The Manufacturers of Kangaroo Leather Soccer Shoes

Home , KangaRoos, Kangaroo leather, Nike Tiempo, Skins (sportswear)

Item No. 2 STAFF SUMMARY FOR AUGUST 19-20, 2020

2. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT (DAY 1)

Today’s Item Information ☒ Action ☐ Receive public comment regarding topics within FGC authority that are not included on the agenda.

Summary of Previous/Future Actions • Today receive requests and comments Aug 19-20, 2020; Webinar/Teleconference • Consider granting, denying, or referring Oct 14-15, 2020; Webinar/Teleconference

Background

This item is to provide the public an opportunity to address FGC on topics not on the agenda. Staff may include written materials and comments received prior to the meeting as exhibits in the meeting binder (if received by written comment deadline), or as supplemental comments at the meeting (if received by the supplemental comment deadline).

Public comments are generally categorized into three types under general public comment: (1) petitions for regulation change; (2) requests for non-regulatory action; and (3) informational- only comments. Under the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, FGC cannot discuss or take action on any matter not included on the agenda, other than to schedule issues raised by the public for consideration at future meetings. Thus, petitions for regulation change and non- regulatory requests generally follow a two-meeting cycle (receipt and direction); FGC will determine the outcome of the petitions for regulation change and non-regulatory requests received at today’s meeting at the next regular FGC meeting, following staff evaluation (currently Oct 14-15, 2020).

As required by the Administrative Procedure Act, petitions for regulation change will be either denied or granted and notice made of that determination. Action on petitions received at previous meetings is scheduled under a separate agenda item titled “Petitions for regulation change.” Action on non-regulatory requests received at previous meetings is scheduled under a separate agenda item titled “Non-regulatory requests.”

Significant Public Comments 1. New petitions for regulation change are summarized in Exhibit 1, and the original petitions are provided as exhibits 3-5. 2. A request for non-regulatory action is summarized in Exhibit 2, and the original requests are provided in exhibits 6-7. 3. Informational comments are provided as exhibits 8-14.

Recommendation FGC staff: Consider whether any future agenda items are needed to address issues that are raised during public comment.

Author: Rose Dodgen 1 Item No. 2 STAFF SUMMARY FOR AUGUST 19-20, 2020

Exhibits 1. Summary of new petitions for regulation change received by Aug 6, 2020 at 5:00 p.m. 2. Summary of requests for non-regulatory action received by Aug 6, 2020 at 5:00 p.m. 3. Petition #2020-007 AM 1: Authorize surfboard fishing at South La Jolla State Marine Reserve, received Jul 10, 2020 4. Petition #2020-009: Require reporting of mammals taken for nuisance wildlife control (with exceptions) on annual trapping reports, received Jun 25, 2020 5. Petition #2020-010: Reduce wild rainbow and brown trout limits at Stanislaus River and Beaver Creek to zero, received Jul 28, 2020 6. Email from Ashley Eagle-Gibbs with attached letter from Morgan Patton, West Marin Environmental Action Committee, regarding increased consumptive activity in the Duxbury Reef State Marine Conservation Area, received Aug 6, 2020 7. Letter from Jake Elzenga requesting trout planting in astretch of the Merced River, received Aug 6, 2020 8. Letter from Dennis Fox concerning a fee-to-trust acquisition proposal in Kern County, received Jun 22, 2020 9. Email from Linea Carlson suggesting that fishing is cruel and people should stop fishing, received Jul 1, 2020 10. Email from Eric Mills in remembrance of former State Resources Secretary Huey Johnson, received Jul 14, 2020 11. Email and letter from Mitchell Fox, Center for a Humane Economy, to Director Chuck Bonham concerning enforcement of California Penal Code Section 6530 (related to kangaroo parts), received Jul 22, 2020 12. Email from Pheobe Lenhart, received Aug 4, 2020, and response from Shawn Fresz, received Aug 5, 2020, concerning the size of the Roosevelt elk population in Del Norte County and DFW’s data gathering methods 13. Email from Jonnel Covault outlining concerns about Roosevelt elk hunting and treponome-associated hoof disease (TAHD), received Aug 5, 2020 14. Email from Janet Gilbert outlining concerns about Roosevelt elk tag allotments and TAHD, received Aug 5, 2020

Motion/Direction (N/A)

Author: Rose Dodgen 2 CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME COMMISSION RECEIPT LIST FOR PETITIONS FOR REGULATION CHANGE: RECEIVED BY 5:00 PM ON AUGUST 6, 2020 Revised 8/10/2020

Date Subject Tracking No. Name of Petitioner Short Description FGC Receipt Scheduled FGC Action Scheduled Received of Request Authorize surfboard fishing Amend marine protected area regulations to allow surfboard 2020-007 AM 1 7/10/2020 Russell Goltz at South La Jolla State 8/19-20/2020 10/14-15/2020 fishing at the South La Jolla State Marine Reserve. Marine Reserve Amend Section 467 to require licensed trappers to include all Require reporting of furbearing and nongame mammals (excluding non-native mice mammals taken for 2020-009 6/25/2020 Rebecca Dmytryk and rats, gophers, voles) taken through nuisance wildlife 8/19-20/2020 10/14-15/2020 nuisannce wildlife control control operations in their annual submission of take, as per on annual trapping reports. Section 467 Trapping Reports. Reduce bag limit for wild rainbow and brown trout at Change the limit of wild rainbow and brown trout on the North 2020-010 7/28/2020 Shaun Reid 8/19-20/2020 10/14-15/2020 Stanislaus River and Fork of the Stanislaus River and Beaver Creek to zero. Beaver Creek

Page 1 of 1 CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME COMMISSION - NONREGULATORY REQUESTS - RECEIPT Revised 8/10/2020 FGC: California Fish and Game Commission | DFW: California Department of Fish and Wildlife | WRC: Wildlife Resources Committee | MRC: Marine Resources Committee

Date Short Name/ Subject Category Received Description Organization of Requestor

Request increased enforcement patrols in the area of Duxbury Reef SMCA due to increased instances Consumptive activities at Duxbury Morgan Patton, West Marin Environmental 8/6/2020 of consumptive activity and potential poaching. Marine Reef State Marine Conservation Area Action Committee Want to ensure no-take restrictions are being (SMCA) enforced. Requests planting 50-75 trout in the Merced River west of Lake McClure. Concerned that fish 8/6/2020 Trout planting in the Merced River Jake Elzenga Wildlife cannot reach this stretch of river because water is diverted for irrigation and power generation.

Page 1 of 1 State of California – Fish and Game Commission PETITION TO THE CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME COMMISSION FOR REGULATION CHANGE FGC 1 (Rev 06/19) Page 1 of 3

Tracking Number: (__2020-007 AM 1__)

To request a change to regulations under the authority of the California Fish and Game Commission (Commission), you are required to submit this completed form to: California Fish and Game Commission, (physical address) 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1320, Sacramento, CA 95814, (mailing address) P.O. Box 944209, Sacramento, CA 94244-2090 or via email to [email protected]. Note: This form is not intended for listing petitions for threatened or endangered species (see Section 670.1 of Title 14).

Incomplete forms will not be accepted. A petition is incomplete if it is not submitted on this form or fails to contain necessary information in each of the required categories listed on this form (Section I). A petition will be rejected if it does not pertain to issues under the Commission’s authority. A petition may be denied if any petition requesting a functionally equivalent regulation change was considered within the previous 12 months and no information or data is being submitted beyond what was previously submitted. If you need help with this form, please contact Commission staff at (916) 653- 4899 or [email protected].

SECTION I: Required Information.

Please be succinct. Responses for Section I should not exceed five pages

1. Person or organization requesting the change (Required) Name of primary contact person: Russell Goltz Address: Telephone number Email address

2. Rulemaking Authority (Required) - Reference to the statutory or constitutional authority of the Commission to take the action requested : Rulemaking Authority: Sections 200, 205(c), 265, 399, 1590, 1591, 2860, 2861 and 6750, Fish and Game Code; and Sections 36725(a) and 36725(e), Public Resources Code2020-007

3. Overview (Required) - Summarize the proposed changes to regulations – Please allow surfboard fishing at the South La Jolla State Marine Preserve. If we can get out there without using gas or electric, just arm power, it will limit the number of fishermen to a minimum amount. No Sport Fishing Boats. You can even make it a catch and release required, that would be fine. I just want to be able to again walk across the street and go fishing from my surfboard.

4. Rationale (Required) - Describe the problem and the reason for the proposed change – The problem is I have to drive 3 miles to be able to do my favorite thing in the world to do. I am 65 years old, and only have a few years left to be able to do this sport. The way I read the California Constitution, Article 1 Section 25, and since it’s not a “Fishery”, I should be able to fish there. But I understand the way of the world, all I want is for ME to be able to fish at Tourmaline Street in Pacific Beach.

State of California – Fish and Game Commission PETITION TO THE CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME COMMISSION FOR REGULATION CHANGE FGC 1 (Rev 06/19) Page 2 of 3

SECTION II: Optional Information

5. Date of Petition 06-03-2020

6. Category of Proposed Change X Sport Fishing ☐ Commercial Fishing ☐ Hunting ☐ Other, please specify: Click here to enter text.

7. The proposal is to: (To determine section number(s), see current year regulation booklet or https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs) ☐ Amend Title 14 Section(s):Click here to enter text. ☐ Add New Title 14 Section(s): Click here to enter text. ☐ Repeal Title 14 Section(s): Click here to enter text.

8. If the proposal is related to a previously submitted petition that was rejected, specify the tracking number of the previously submitted petition Click here to enter text. Or X Not applicable.

9. Effective date: If applicable, identify the desired effective date of the regulation. If the proposed change requires immediate implementation, explain the nature of the emergency – As soon as possible!

10. Supporting documentation: Identify and attach to the petition any information supporting the proposal including data, reports and other documents – attached are a few documents for your reading pleasure.

12. Forms: If applicable, list any forms to be created, amended or repealed: Click here to enter text.

SECTION 3: FGC Staff Only

Date received: Click here to enter text.

FGC staff action: ☐ Accept - complete ☐ Reject - incomplete ☐ Reject - outside scope of FGC authority Tracking Number Date petitioner was notified of receipt of petition and pending action: ______

State of California – Fish and Game Commission PETITION TO THE CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME COMMISSION FOR REGULATION CHANGE FGC 1 (Rev 06/19) Page 3 of 3

Meeting date for FGC consideration: ______

FGC action: ☐ Denied by FGC ☐ Denied - same as petition ______Tracking Number ☐ Granted for consideration of regulation change

State of California – Fish and Game Commission PETITION TO THE CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME COMMISSION FOR REGULATION CHANGE FGC 1 (NEW 10/23/14) Page 1 of 2

Tracking Number: (______) 2020-009

SECTION I: Required Information.

Please be succinct. Responses for Section I should not exceed five pages

1. Person or organization requesting the change (Required) Name of primary contact person: Rebecca Dmytryk Address: Telephone number: Email address:

2. Rulemaking Authority (Required) - Reference to the statutory or constitutional authority of the Commission to take the action requested: Authority cited: Sections 200, 203, 265, 4009.5 and 4150, Fish and Game Code. Reference: Sections 110, 200, 201, 203, 203.1, 260, 265, 270, 275, 4000, 4002, 4003, 4004, 4005, 4006, 4007, 4008, 4009, 4009.5, 4010, 4011 and 4012, Fish and Game Code.

3. Overview (Required) - Summarize the proposed changes to regulations:

Petitioner seeks to have § 467 amended to Require licensed trappers to include all furbearing and nongame mammals (excluding non-native mice and rats, gophers, voles) taken through nuisance wildlife control operations in their annual submission of take as per § 467 Trapping Reports.

4. Rationale (Required) - Describe the problem and the reason for the proposed change:

Thousands of the State’s wildlife is taken under nuisance wildlife control operations annually and never reported - never accounted for. It is the responsibility of this trustee agency to account for loss / take of natural resources, therefore such take should be documented.

SECTION II: Optional Information

5. Date of Petition:

6. Category of Proposed Change ☐ Sport Fishing ☐ Commercial Fishing ☐ Hunting Other, please specify: Use of Traps

State of California – Fish and Game Commission PETITION TO THE CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME COMMISSION FOR REGULATION CHANGE FGC 1 (NEW 10/23/14) Page 2 of 2

7. The proposal is to: ( T o determine section number(s), see current year regulation booklet or https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs) Amend Title 14 Section(s): § 467 ☐ Add New Title 14 Section(s): ☐ Repeal Title 14 Section(s):

8. If the proposal is related to a previously submitted petition that was rejected, specify the tracking number of the previously submitted petition. Not applicable.

9. Effective date: If applicable, identify the desired effective date of the regulation. If the proposed change requires immediate implementation, explain the nature of the emergency: July 1, 2021

10. Supporting documentation: Identify and attach to the petition any information supporting the proposal including data, reports and other documents:

12. Forms: If applicable, list any forms to be created, amended or repealed:

SECTION 3: FGC Staff Only

Date received:

Meeting date for FGC consideration: ______

FGC action: ☐ Denied by FGC ☐ Denied - same as petition ______Tracking Number ☐ Granted for consideration of regulation change

State of California – Fish and Game Commission PETITION TO THE CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME COMMISSION FOR REGULATION CHANGE FGC 1 (Rev 06/19) Page 1 of 2

Tracking Number: (_2020-010_)

SECTION I: Required Information.

Please be succinct. Responses for Section I should not exceed five pages

1. Person or organization requesting the change (Required) Name of primary contact person: Shaun Reid. Address: Telephone number: Email address:

2. Rulemaking Authority (Required) - Reference to the statutory or constitutional authority of the Commission to take the action requested: sections 200, 205, 265, 270, 275, 315, 316.5, 399, and 2084 of the Fish and Game Code

3. Overview (Required) - Summarize the proposed changes to regulations: Change the limit of wild rainbow and brown trout on the North Fork of the Stanislaus River and Beaver Creek to zero.

4. Rationale (Required) - Describe the problem and the reason for the proposed change: These waters are heavily pressured, but over the past couple of years, I have been catching more wild fish, both browns and rainbows. I’m really quite amazed at the fish I’m catching, particularly this season. This tells me that these waters have the ability to support wild fish populations, which makes for a great angling experience..

SECTION II: Optional Information

5. Date of Petition: July 28, 2020

6. Category of Proposed Change x Sport Fishing ☐ Commercial Fishing ☐ Hunting

State of California – Fish and Game Commission PETITION TO THE CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME COMMISSION FOR REGULATION CHANGE FGC 1 (Rev 06/19) Page 2 of 2

☐ Other, please specify: Click here to enter text.

7. The proposal is to: (To determine section number(s), see current year regulation booklet or https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs) ☐ Amend Title 14 Section(s): Click here to enter text. ☐ Add New Title 14 Section(s): Click here to enter text. ☐ Repeal Title 14 Section(s): Click here to enter text.

8. If the proposal is related to a previously submitted petition that was rejected, specify the tracking number of the previously submitted petition Click here to enter text. Or ☐ Not applicable.

10. Supporting documentation: Identify and attach to the petition any information supporting the proposal including data, reports and other documents: Click here to enter text.

11. Economic or Fiscal Impacts: Identify any known impacts of the proposed regulation change on revenues to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, individuals, businesses, jobs, other state agencies, local agencies, schools, or housing: So long as fish continue to be planted, I see no reason that this would impact local businesses. In fact, should the fishery improve with bigger, wild fish, I suspect it could be a boost for the area.

12. Forms: If applicable, list any forms to be created, amended or repealed: Click here to enter text.

SECTION 3: FGC Staff Only

Date received: Click here to enter text.

Meeting date for FGC consideration: ______

FGC action: ☐ Denied by FGC ☐ Denied - same as petition ______Tracking Number ☐ Granted for consideration of regulation change

From: Ashley Eagle-Gibbs Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 4:56 PM To: FGC Cc: Morgan Patton Subject: EAC Comment re. Agenda Item 2: General public comment, Duxbury Reef SMCA, Increased Consumptive Activities

Dear Commissioners,

Please find attached a comment letter for general public comment in advance of your August meeting. This letter is regarding Duxbury Reef State Marine Conservation Area and increased consumptive activities. Thank you for your consideration of EAC's comments.

Sincerely, Ashley Eagle-Gibbs

Ashley Eagle-Gibbs, Esq. | Conservation Director Environmental Action Committee of West Marin (EAC)

Keeping West Marin Wild Since 1971

Website | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

* Please note I am typically out of the office on Fridays.

The information contained in this message may be privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify EAC immediately and delete this message from your computer. Thank you.

EAC Comments re. Duxbury Reef State Marine Conservation Area August 6, 2020

August 6, 2020

California Fish and Game Commission 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1320 Sacramento, CA 95814 Submitted electronically: [email protected]

RE: Agenda Item 2: General public comment Duxbury Reef State Marine Conservation Area, Increased Consumptive Activities

Dear Fish and Game Commissioners,

The Environmental Action Committee of West Marin (EAC) is an environmental organization based on Point Reyes Station, California, working to protect and sustain the unique lands, waters, and biodiversity found in western Marin County.

Since 2014, EAC has administered a Marine Protected Area Watch (MPA Watch) community science program at Agate Beach / Duxbury Reef State Marine Conservation Area (SMCA). MPA Watch is a statewide program that trains volunteers to observe and collect data on human uses of coastal and marine resources both inside and outside MPAs. Our program is focused on MPAs in or near Marin County.

I am writing today to raise awareness with resource management agencies of the increased potential poaching activities occurring within the Duxbury SMCA and the need for enforcement response. We are currently in discussion with California Department of Fish and Wildlife enforcement, Point Reyes National Seashore, and Marin County Parks and Open Space concerning this issue.

EAC received reports from our volunteers last week concerned by the alarming increase in consumptive activities at Duxbury Reef SMCA beginning in May, June, and July 2020. A review of our data indicates a sharp increase in visitation and potential poaching Duxbury Reef SMCA in July 2020.

1 of 5 EAC Comments re. Duxbury Reef State Marine Conservation Area August 6, 2020

Our MPA Watch rate of on-shore consumptive activity (taking or collecting) from January 1 – July 29, 2020 compared to 2014-2019 has increased by 100% from a rate of 3.2 activities per survey mile to a rate of 6.4 activities per survey mile.

Our volunteers are observing dozens of people on the Reef outside of prior years’ statistical high- visitation dates, and observing people in increased numbers with collecting materials. Some are collecting for personal consumption, while others are unintentionally collecting (placing organisms into buckets for observation or play), and they are totally unaware they are in an MPA.

We are requesting immediate attention from resource protection agencies with jurisdiction to protect the areas of Agate Beach and Duxbury Reef to increase enforcement patrols to ensure MPA compliance. Duxbury Reef is a SMCA where it is unlawful to injure, damage, take, or possess any living, geological, or cultural marine resource for recreational and/or commercial purposes, with the following specified exceptions: The recreational take of finfish from shore and abalone is allowed.1

Examples of likely poaching activities observed by MPA Watch volunteers in July 2020:

July 11, 2020: 3-foot tide, 2:00pm On-Shore Consumption. One group of 5 individuals was collecting Tegula funebralis. They were told that activity was not permitted. They returned to the intertidal the Tegula that they had collected.

July 19, 2020: 3-foot tide, 9:50am Offshore Violation (reported to CDFW) Violation was reported on DFW's website and by a separate email to DFW officer's email address (with photos attached).

July 24, 2020: 0.1-foot tide, 8:55am On-Shore Consumption. Elementary school class (grades 1-4) from Novato School District. Collecting done by class; spoke to them and it largely stopped their collecting. Spear fisherman is a "local", collected and took some invertebrates.

July 25, 2020: 0.1-foot tide, 9:30am On-Shore Consumption. 4 people collecting for consumption: 1 bucket of Strongylocentrotus purpuratus (#36) and 1 bucket of Tegula funebralis (#100+). Male was carrying a metal pry bar. I observed 5 S.

1 California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Duxbury State Marine Conservation Area, accessed at: https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=91616&inline

2 of 5 EAC Comments re. Duxbury Reef State Marine Conservation Area August 6, 2020

purpuratus freshly crushed in pools along base of berm and fresh broken S. purpuratus habitat (i.e. destroyed urchin holes in rocky reef). Collectors stated that he learned of the site on iNaturalist. I returned both buckets into water, however, much mortality. Joe Mueller, College of Marin Professor, and his student research assistants witnessed this.

On July 17, 2020, the Los Angeles Times published an article that highlighted the excessive crowds removing sea creatures from San Pedro tide pools and quoted state game warden Doug Wall, “I’ve never seen so many people combing these tide pools for food…over the past month, I’ve issued about 30 citations for infractions in Southern California’s tide pools.”2

We are concerned Duxbury Reef SMCA may be on the same path as some of our Southern California intertidal areas and would like to prevent this before it is too late. Poaching at Duxbury Reef SMCA could severely harm this fragile ecosystem. Taking of any species (except for hook and line fishing for finfish) is prohibited and increased patrols are in need to ensure compliance as public visitation to the beach and reef are steadily increasing.

EAC, in partnership with Marin County Open Space, is currently designing a docent program that would train volunteers in the fall of 2020 launch at Duxbury Reef SMCA in the spring of 2021. Unfortunately, due to the pandemic, we are now witnessing the increases of human visitation at Duxbury Reef SMCA without adequate visitor support and resources to provide public education on the MPA and appropriate tide pool etiquette.

In order to provide public education and outreach, EAC is planning to ask our MPA Watch volunteers to assist with an ad-hoc docent team to provide California Department of Fish and Wildlife information and materials at the trailhead at the Agate Beach parking lot in the short-term. Our volunteers are not enforcement, but they can assist with interpretation and public education to assist with compliance with proper face coverings and social distancing.

In order to ensure compliance, it is imperative that patrols take place to begin to issue citations to poachers at Duxbury Reef SMCA as soon as possible.

If needed, EAC is willing to provide a general list of dates when we can anticipate the potential for increased visitation and potential for poaching based on the tide conditions and time of day. In general, we are witnessing crowds at any low or medium tide before 2pm on any day of the week. This is a dramatic shift in human visitation and potential poaching activities from what our program has observed

2 Los Angeles Times, Excessive Crowds Removing Sea Creatures from San Pedro Tide Pools Put Delicate Ecosystems at Risk, accessed at: https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2020-07-17/unprecedented-crowds-are-harvesting-sea- creatures-from-san-pedros-famous-tide-pools?fbclid=IwAR2LacqMiHUHEdz- zsUvWXSsen7Go3r8iXoVRYc5cDCsGUYcM3GBdUAlYt8

3 of 5 EAC Comments re. Duxbury Reef State Marine Conservation Area August 6, 2020 at Duxbury Reef SMCA since 2014. For reference, we have included an attachment to this letter copies of the charts and graphs of the MPA Watch data for reference and review.

We look forward to discussing this issue in the near future to ensure the protection of our coastal and marine resources. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Morgan Patton Executive Director

4 of 5 EAC Comments re. Duxbury Reef State Marine Conservation Area August 6, 2020

Attachment 1: Marin MPA Watch Data Duxbury Reef State Marine Conservation Area

Activity Incidence: January 1 – July 29, 2020 / Compared to January 1 – July 29, 2014-2019 Number of activities recorded divided by total survey-miles to obtain incidence rate per mile.

Total Consumptive Activities (collecting or taking): 2014-2020 Total number of consumptive activities recorded over time.

5 of 5

From: LInea Carlson Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2020 8:02 AM To: FGC Subject: Don't fish

DON'T FISH, it just a god awful thing to do. when you think about how bad it is to place food on the end of a hook. Seriously. Fishing is a deceitful, cruel and a horrible thing to do. To be cosidered gameing is sick. Just imagine sitting down with the people you love to have dinner and you take a bite of your salad and you immediately get yanked out of your seat, out of your home away from the people you love choking to death on a hook as you are wiggling on an end of a line . Never to be heard from again. THATS what you do when you fish. NO MORE FISHING. SEEMS HARMLESS BUT NOT SO! Could you imagine how traumatic for the other fish. And they get hungry but yet they are too scared to eat from what they've witnessed. Just terrible. People go out and buy more alluring colorful. bait. NOW think about how cruel it is as well for the LIVE BAIT. NO STOP at BAITING a hook, it's just a terrible act. You treat everybody everyTHING the way you want to be treated. YOU Definately want to pass this test. ANIMALS don't talk to US for a reason. You should know better. Well now you do.. TREAT ALL LIFE EVERYTHING THE WAY YOU WANT AND EXPECT TO BE TREATED.. THE VERY BEST! And alls good. DON'T FISH.

Thank you, Linea Carlson

From: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2020 11:35 AM To: Office of the Secretary CNRA ; FGC ; Wildlife DIRECTOR ; Cornman, Ari@FGC Subject: HUEY JOHNSON - R.I.P.

------

Another giant fallen - R.I.P.

Former State Resources Secretary Johnson wrote the Fish & Game Commission TWICE in support of our efforts to stop the non-native frog/turtle imports for the live animal food markets. A good man, he, right up there with His hero Aldo Leopold, and John Muir and David Brower, IMO. x Eric Mills, coordinator ACTION FOR ANIMALS Oakland

Original Message ------Subject: HUEY JOHNSON - R.I.P. From: [email protected] Date: Tue, July 14, 2020 11:06 am To: [email protected] ------https://gcc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sfchronicle.com%2Fenviron ment%2Farticle%2FHuey-Johnson-longtime-environmental-savior-from- 15405475.php&data=02%7C01%7Cfgc%40fgc.ca.gov%7C6b22819937374055833708d82824ac9d% 7C4b633c25efbf40069f1507442ba7aa0b%7C0%7C0%7C637303485288552871&sdata=TTxBn%2B6 ycAHzyT4t6xdGZn2Qb4DU95zxOZR76IPsbbk%3D&reserved=0

From: Mitchell Fox Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 3:27 PM To: FGC Subject: Report on Statute 653o -- kangaroo parts ban

Greetings, I am hoping to get these couple of documents to the California Fish & Game Commission.

Thank you,

Mitchell

Mitchell Fox Director of Advocacy Center for a Humane Economy [email protected]

July 22, 2022

Charlton Bonham Director California Department of Fish and Wildlife 1416 9th Street, 12th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814

Mr. Bonham:

Over the past several months, the Center for a Humane Economy has methodically examined whether retailers in the athletic shoe industry are adhering to California Penal Code § 653o, specifically as it applies to kangaroo skin soccer shoes (cleats) imported into and sold in the state. That law has been in effect since 2016. This Report offers a detailed and comprehensive picture of broad non-compliance with the ban on selling kangaroo parts. It is apparent that California officials are not enforcing the law and even failing to notify retailers about the law.

If the Department were to communicate with store owners and athletic shoe companies, we are confident that most would follow the law. Many of the big-name brands in the athletic shoe industry - which sell direct to the public through outlet stores and their own online channels, as well as distributors and store owners - are publicly traded companies, with legal compliance mandates and capacity. They have more to lose than to gain in profits from continuing to sell contraband that constitute just a small percentage of their total sales.

Our investigation has identified the specific businesses responsible for the import and sale of tens of thousands of kangaroo skin soccer shoes In California in violation of California Penal Code § 653o. These businesses include:

* 9 manufacturers wholesaling into the state * 7 manufacturers selling online and shipping to California addresses * 71 reputable e-commerce websites selling and shipping into California * 78 soccer stores selling to the public * 1 national sporting goods chain selling to the public

We have attached our report for your review. We urge you to communicate directly with companies knowingly violating the law and to direct them to stop. This report provides contact information for each violator: names, addresses, phone numbers, email and websites, to the extent that they are discoverable.

For the past four years, the Department appears to have failed to fulfill its responsibility on behalf of California citizens to enforce this law. Enforcement action, in this case, does not require extensive undercover sting operations or expensive laboratory testing equipment. These sales, by their nature, occur out in the open and the use of kangaroo leather in products is celebrated by the perpetrators. Department personnel can simply conduct an elementary screening of on-line and in-store shopping to gauge industry

Forging a humane economic order.

adherence.

Millions of acres of habitat and a billion animals including uncounted kangaroos perished in wildfires six months ago, making a reduction in mass commercial killing an even more exigent circumstance. It is the sale of kangaroo leather soccer shoes that drives the commercial killing of wild kangaroos in Australia. As the largest soccer market in the nation, California's enforcement agencies can fulfill the California's Legislature's legal stricture to stop contributing to the trafficking of kangaroo parts.

In addition to this report, we would like to give the Department access to our database and other research materials with critical information on manufacturers, retailers and websites that are continuing to conduct illegal activity. We are eager to provide whatever assistance we can to the Department to help in enforcing the law. Here is a link https://tinyurl.com/yyh5lcl3 to our Report.

Thank you,

Wayne Pacelle Mitchell Fox President Director of Advocacy Center for a Humane Economy Center for a Humane Economy

Forging a humane economic order. SKIN IN THE GAME AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE ILLEGAL TRADE OF KANGAROO PARTS IN CALIFORNIA

Published by the Center for a Humane Economy, July 22, 2020

Part of the reason you see companies use the phrase “k-leather” is that they don’t like advertising the fact that kangaroo leather comes from the hide of a kangaroo. The use of kangaroo leather is very controversial, with the sale of kangaroo leather products being banned in California, so the abbreviation helps hide the cleat’s contentious origins.

The18.com Looking At Different Cleat Materials: Which Ones Are Popular And Who Wears What?

For context 3 Executive summary 4 Introduction 7 California’s ban on Kangaroo products 8 Manufacturers of kangaroo leather soccer shoes 11 Retailers of kangaroo leather soccer shoes 17 E-commerce website selling kangaroo leather soccer shoes 31 Discussion 38 Conclusion 41 More on the commercial kangaroo industry in Australia 44

For Context

Commercial shooters kill some two million wild kangaroos a year in their native Australian habitat to profit from the trade in their skins, a toll that includes 400,000 joeys bludgeoned to death or left behind to starve after their mothers are slain. Recognizing the inhumanity of the industry, California’s legislature re-imposed a ban on the sale of kangaroo products in 2016.

An investigation by the Center for a Humane Economy found that enforcement of the ban has been non-existent, and kangaroo skin soccer shoes from Nike, adidas, Puma and six other major manufacturers remain available at sporting goods and specialty soccer stores throughout the state.

The government of Australia continues to allow this commercial slaughter even after cataclysmic fires scorched Australia just months ago, killing more than a billion animals, including uncounted kangaroos. Scientists predict climate change will continue to alter habitats and make it more difficult for kangaroos to survive at their pre-existing population levels. Today kangaroos face a perilous future from these dual human impacts – commercial slaughter of native wildlife on a massive scale, and climate-change-induced fires of unprecedented intensity.

Australia’s fires triggered an outpouring of compassion from the global community, with people from around the world sending aid and volunteering to help. One of their tasks was to feed and care for orphaned and injured joeys. Now, six months after the round-the-clock efforts to nurse these traumatized animals back to health, the kangaroos may be released into their native habitats only to be shot for soccer shoes in the largest commercial killing of wildlife in the world.

Halting the sale of kangaroo leather soccer shoes in California – the largest soccer market in the country – would have a major impact on the survival of kangaroos. It is the market for skins that drives the commercial kangaroo industry, with 70 percent of all skins sold for soccer shoes.

Neither soccer players nor soccer stores in California will be set back without kangaroo skin shoes. The high-performance choice of top players today are shoes made of synthetics, mesh, knits, and artificial kangaroo skin. These are by far the top-selling soccer cleats throughout the state.

Nine athletic shoe manufacturers, including global brands Nike and adidas, sell over 70 models of soccer cleats made of kangaroo skin. While legal in 49 states, the trade in kangaroo parts is prohibited in California, with 40 million consumers.

California Penal Code § 653o (“§ 653o”), prohibiting the commercial import or sale of kangaroo parts in the state, became law in 1971. Each individual violation is punishable by a fine of $1,000 to $5,000 and/ or six months in county jail. From 2007 to 2016, at the urging of Australia’s commercial kangaroo industry, the California Legislature suspended the ban, but it has been in effect for the past four years. An investigation by the Center for a Humane Economy revealed the law to have minimal impact on curtailing the sale of kangaroo leather (widely known as “k-leather”) soccer shoes into and within the state. Due to lack of enforcement by authorities, compliance with the law is largely voluntary, driven by the ethics of manufacturers and retailers.

The demand for “old school boots” made of kangaroo leather is being met despite the state law. Numerous store owners point out that California’s failure to enforce the law leaves violators free to engage in an unfair business practice. Authorities should not allow honest retailers to be undercut by competitors knowingly breaking the law by trading in kangaroo parts.

Today, kangaroo leather cleats are readily obtained in California, with more brick-and-mortar and online retailers breaking the law than adhering to it. The Center’s findings are intended to highlight the need for California authorities, including multiple law enforcement agencies, to take necessary steps to ensure compliance with § 653o so that, as the legislature intended, California is not contributing to the commercial killing of kangaroos in Australia.

In examining nine soccer cleat manufacturers, 117 independent soccer stores, eight national chains with 460 locations in California, and 76 online retailers, the Center has found:

• Nine major athletic footwear manufacturers, with headquarters in Germany, Italy, Japan and the U.S., violate the law by supplying California retailers with tens of thousands of kangaroo leather soccer cleats. Nike, adidas, and Puma sell the most “k-leather” shoes into the state.

4 • Six of those nine manufacturers violate the law by selling kangaroo leather soccer cleats directly to California residents from their websites. Earlier this spring, Nike appeared to have halted the practice after repeated notices from the Center for a Humane Economy, but has resumed illegal sales.

• Illegal Kangaroo leather soccer shoes can be purchased at 70 percent of the 117 soccer specialty retailers in the state, ranging from Chula Vista to Redding.

• Of soccer stores in the Los Angeles area, 45 violate the law, 12 do not. Of soccer stores in the San Francisco area, 21 violate the law, 11 do not.

• Of the four national sporting goods chains, collectively operating 370 stores in the state, only Dick’s Sporting Goods violates the law. Some, but not all, of Dick’s 58 locations sell kangaroo leather cleats.

• Of the 76 dominant e-commerce websites selling kangaroo leather cleats, 84 percent do not appear to take any measures preventing the illegal sale of kangaroo leather soccer cleats to California customers, including eBay and Eastbay; eight percent acknowledge the California law but violate it, like Zappos and Dick’s Sporting Goods; eight percent block orders and prevent violations, like Amazon and Soccer.com.

• Of California businesses selling kangaroo leather soccer cleats, the largest violators include Azteca, The Coliseum, Nicky’s, Pro Soccer, Soccer Garage, Soccer Plus, Soccer Post, Soccer Wearhouse, Sports Page Soccer Wearhouse and Xtreme Soccer.

Over several months, the Center has investigated compliance with California Penal Code § 653o, the statute banning the import and sale of kangaroo leather in California. We directly contacted every major athletic shoe manufacturer and retailer selling in the state, examined their websites for inventory and offerings, made numerous in-person visits to soccer stores, searched law enforcement records, and engaged in a wide range of other activities to understand the athletic wear industry’s level of compliance with the law.

This Report identifies key players in the soccer cleat industry who fail to comply with the ban, recommends best practices to achieve compliance, and strongly urges California authorities to enforce the kangaroo products prohibition.

© 2020 The Center for a Humane Economy The Center for a Humane Economy, a nonprofit organization promoting a more humane economy through corporate engagement and advocacy, works with companies to decrease or eliminate adverse impacts on animals in their production practices, supply chains, and research and development activities.

Who is breaking the law?

Manufacturers when they: Sell kangaroo leather cleats to stores in California Sell kangaroo leather cleats and ship to a California address

California stores when they: Buy kangaroo leather cleats to sell Sell kangaroo leather cleats to shoppers Sell kangaroo leather cleats and ship to a California address

Websites when they: Sell kangaroo leather cleats and ship to a California address

6 Introduction

The world first took notice of soccer cleats made from kangaroo skin at the 1970 World Cup where Pele famously delayed the start of Brazil’s quarterfinal match with Peru to tie the shoes of his new, exotically sourced Puma Kings. For so publicly cinching and putting a bow on his new signature cleats, Pele was reportedly paid $120,000 by Puma. That U.S. trade was interrupted with several species of kangaroos listed as threatened or endangered in the Endangered Species Act, passed by Congress in 1973. But cleats made from kangaroo skins had landed on the world stage and athletic shoe companies persisted with their use as a core material in their shoes.

Kangaroos were removed from the list of endangered species in the U.S. in 1995, clearing the way for wider use. But it was not without controversy and animal activists in Britain soon started a multi-year campaign to encourage David Beckham – the biggest soccer star of his era – to take a stand against kangaroo leather cleats. Reportedly after seeing the killing of kangaroos in their native habitat, Beckham obliged, trading in kangaroo leather for high-tech synthetic materials in his signature adidas Predators. Beckham brought his new kangaroo-free boots to California to play for LA Galaxy of Major League Soccer in 2007. It might have seemed the perfect fit, since kangaroo leather was illegal in California. But fans who wanted to emulate the greats in their footwear had other choices: Californians were still buying Pele’s kangaroo leather Puma Kings and the adidas answer to it, the popular Copa Mundial, highlighted in the 1982 World Cup. “For unknown reasons, California Fish and Game haven’t been enforcing the law,” said a California Senate staff member that year. “They’re being sold all over the place.”

An animal advocacy group tried to enforce the law itself, arguing that adidas had engaged in an unfair business practice by not complying with the law. The group prevailed in the California Supreme Court, and the door seemed open to more citizen enforcement if necessary. Adidas promptly took the fight to the California Assembly and with support from LA Galaxy and the Australian government, succeeded in freezing the ban on kangaroo products for four years, followed by a second extension for five years and a failed third attempt. The on-again, off-again, under-enforced kangaroo parts ban has been in effect since 2016.

What has it meant for kangaroo leather cleats four years later, in the state the Australian government calls “the largest soccer market in the world?” The Center undertook this investigation with the three-fold goal to 1) define the universe of businesses selling soccer cleats in California, 2) determine compliance with the kangaroo products law, and 3) understand enforcement efforts as applied to this restriction on the trade in wildlife parts.

Recognizing the need to protect animals becoming threatened and endangered in other parts of the world, California legislators passed § 653o in 1970. The statute forbade importing and selling products made from the body parts of fifteen animals. By prohibiting legal sales in the state, California legislators were doing what they could to lower the demand for killing these imperiled animals. A year later, kangaroos were added to the statute.

CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE § 653o

(a) It is unlawful to import into this state for commercial purposes, to possess with intent to sell, or to sell within the state, the dead body, or a part or product thereof, of a polar bear, leopard, ocelot, tiger, cheetah, jaguar, sable antelope, wolf (Canis lupus), zebra, whale, cobra, python, sea turtle, colobus monkey, kangaroo, vicuna, sea otter, free-roaming feral horse, dolphin or porpoise (Delphinidae), Spanish lynx, or elephant.

(d) A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be subject to a fine of not less than one thousand dollars ($1,000) and not to exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000) or imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed six months, or both that fine and imprisonment, for each violation.

Passage, suspension, resumption

California passed § 653o three years before Congress passed the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”) in 1973, including kangaroos on the federal endangered species list. Congress considered § 653o when drafting the ESA, carving out the power to regulate trade of animal skins and products to the states (with a few exceptions concerning the licensing scheme created by the ESA).

The top three commercially hunted species of kangaroos were on the federal endangered species list until 1995 when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service classified the three species as “abundant” and removed them. This delisting action meant that California’s law against the trade in kangaroo skins was the primary barrier to trade for the athletic shoe companies. It turned out, however, that California did not enforce the ban and kangaroo cleats remained on store shelves.

In 2005, the animal advocacy organization VIVA! USA sued adidas for gaining an unfair business advantage by violating § 653o. The California Supreme Court ruled in favor of VIVA! and dismissed adidas’ arguments that § 653o was unconstitutional because regulation of kangaroo skins trade was the federal

8 government’s job. (An elephant, python and kangaroo skin boot maker had made the same argument years earlier, but he too failed.) While this set a precedent for § 653o, the victory was short-lived, with kangaroo-using businesses seeking a different channel to allow their commerce to flourish. Months after the Supreme Court ruling in 2007, the California legislature passed legislation supported by adidas, the Australian government and LA Galaxy, suspending the ban on kangaroo products. The prime sponsor of SB 880 and SB 1345, the bills creating a nine-year moratorium on the kangaroo parts ban, was Senator Ron Calderon. When lobbying groups attempted a third time to extend the moratorium, with Calderon no longer in the Senate (he was serving a 42-month sentence in federal prison for corruption), Assemblyman Mike Gipson took over as the legislative lead. Although a bill had been much anticipated but not introduced, in the final days of the session Gipson used the “gut and amend” technique to enable a vote on the kangaroo moratorium. The effort failed after being labeled as unscrupulous by the media and good government and animal protection groups. Among the proponents of the moratorium, the Australian government was found by the California Fair Political Practices Commission to have violated the Foreign Agents Registration Act.

The kangaroo parts ban came back into force on January 1, 2016. The courts had determined that restricting trade in wildlife parts was a proper exercise of state authority and that the wording of the statute was “plain and unambiguous.” The law has not been challenged meaningfully in the courts or in the Legislature by promoters of kangaroo skins since 2016. The singular issue now is enforcement.

Enforcement responsibility

Formed in part to regulate the trafficking of wildlife fortheir parts, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife is in the best position to take primary responsibility for enforcing § 653o. According to former California AG Bill Lockyer, “The Department is the state agency with primary authority to enforce the Fish and Game Code and Penal Code section 653o.” A § 653o fact sheet on the Law Enforcement Division’s page of the Department’s website aids the public in understanding the law and says, “The Department discourages the sale or commercial importation of any items containing these species except upon advice of a person licensed to practice law in California.”

Since the ban was reinstated in 2016, the Department has not prosecuted a single individual or business for illegally importing or selling kangaroo products, including kangaroo leather soccer shoes. When contacted by the Center earlier this year, Captain Chris Stoots of the Department’s Law Enforcement Division was unaware of any Department program to investigate the sale of kangaroo leather soccer cleats. A set of questions drafted by the Center and circulated by Captain Stoots to Department attorneys and field investigators did not provide additional information.

© 2020 The Center for a Humane Economy Captain Adrian Foss, of Delta Bay Enhanced Enforcement Program and Special Operations Unit, explained the Department receives very little information or reports on kangaroo products being sold in California. He wrote, “without very specific citizen reports, it is difficult to begin an investigation; we do not have inspection authority to randomly enter businesses and start seizing items based upon a hunch they might contain kangaroo. If they are out there, they would be very difficult to discern from other types of leather products without extensive laboratory examination (which our laboratory does not presently have capacities for, nor training in).” His response reinforces: (1) citizens’ tips are critical to kickstart investigations, and (2) the Department is not taking advantage of explicit declaration in manufacturers’ statements, retailers’ marketing, and, in many cases, labels on the shoe’s box and tongue revealing that illegal trade is occurring.

Although the Department has primary responsibility to enforce § 653o, enforcement authority is not limited to the Department. Because the statute is part of California’s general criminal code, any law enforcement officer can investigate a potential violation in their jurisdiction. California city police officers, county sheriffs, or state troopers can investigate stores that may be selling kangaroo skin soccer shoes and file a crime report that is actionable by prosecutors. Citizens therefore can provide tips on violations to any law enforcement authority but follow up is at the discretion of the specific agency.

10 The manufacturers of kangaroo leather soccer shoes

Kangaroo leather cleats sold in California are produced by large multinational corporations offering branded athletic footwear, apparel, and accessories. Most are publicly traded companies. Some operate factories in their home country, while others own or contract with factories overseas for production of kangaroo leather soccer cleats.

Table 1: Manufacturers of Kangaroo Leather Soccer Shoes Sold in California

Manufacturer Website Country Type Founded Phone Email

Adidas adidas.com Germany Public 1949 (931) 234-2300 [email protected] Diadora diadora.com Italy Private 1948 39-0423-6581 [email protected] Lotto Sport Italia lotto.it/us/ Italy Private 1973 39-0423-6181 [email protected] Mizuno mizunousa.com Japan Public 1924 81-6-6614-8465 [email protected] New Balance newbalance.com USA Public 1906 (617) 783-4000 [email protected] Nike nike.com USA Public 1964 (503) 671-6453 [email protected] Pantofola d’Oro pantofoladoro.com Italy Private 1886 39-0289-0960 [email protected] Puma us.puma.com Germany Public 1948 (978) 698-1000 [email protected] Umbro umbro.com England Public* 1924 44-161-492-2000 [email protected]

Manufacturers Mailing Addresses

adidas, 55055 N Greeley Ave, Portland, OR 97217* Diadora, Frazione Villa S. Antonio c/o CIT, 31031 Caerano di San Marco (TV), Italy Lotto, Via Montebelluna 5/7, 31040 Trevignano (TV), Italy Mizuno, 1-12-35 Nanko Kita, Suminoe-ku,Osaka 559-8510, Japan New Balance, 100 guest St, Boston, MA 02135 Nike, One Bowerman Dr, Beaverton, OR 97005 Pantofoloa d’Oro, Via Vidacillo 6, 63100 Ascoli Piceno (AP), Italy Puma,10 Lyberty Way, Westford, MA 01886* Umbro, Umbro House 5000 Lakeside, Cheadle, Manchester, SK8-#GQ, England *address for U.S. division headquarters

© 2020 The Center for a Humane Economy Manufacturers, or those in their supply chain, purchase kangaroo skins directly from licensed skin dealers in Australia. The skin can be obtained semi-raw (fresh, salted, limed, pickled or otherwise preserved, for $5 each) or already tanned (leather, for $56 each). In 2016, the last year for which records are available, 1.3 million semi-raw skins were sold for $6.4 million and shipped primarily to tanneries in Pakistan, Italy, Turkey, and Germany. Some 250,000 leather skins were sold for $14 million, primarily going to factories in Vietnam, Indonesia, Japan, Germany, and Italy (in that order). These are the countries where most of the shoe production takes place.

Approximately 70 percent of all kangaroo skins sold are used for soccer cleats, making the production of soccer shoes the driver behind the commercial kangaroo industry in Australia. Adidas is the world leader in purchasing kangaroo skin.

Of the manufacturers, five publicize policies that directly or indirectly apply to using kangaroo skin:

Adidas: “We trust the Australian Government’s assurances and expertise in this matter.” “Our policies prohibit using leathers from animals that have been inhumanely treated, whether animals are wild or farmed. It is to be stressed that all leather used are by-products of meat production.”

Diadora: A 2019 press release announced, “the total abolition of kangaroo skin from all its products by the end of 2020.”

New Balance: “New Balance seeks to minimize usage of kangaroo leather and restricts the sourcing of kangaroo leather to that which is harvested lawfully under Australia national and state law, the U.S. Federal Endangered Species Act, and applicable international conventions.”

Nike: “Kangaroos - If wild caught, must be sourced from actively managed populations with government agency oversight.”

Puma: “Sustainability Rulebook, Target 2025: Zero use of exotic skins or hides.” Besides wholesaling soccer shoes to retailers, all nine manufacturers sell directly to the public through their websites. Selling kangaroo leather soccer shoes to California residents from their websites is a violation of the statute. Four of the nine manufacturers also operate brick-and mortar factory stores in California.

The Center began its multi-step investigation by identifying which models of soccer cleats use kangaroo leather, compiling a list of 72 models from nine manufacturers. This is the first comprehensive listing of all shoe models made from kangaroos.

12 Table 2: 72 Models of Kangaroo Leather Soccer Cleats

Copa 19+** Morelia KL (and IN) Lazzarini Made in Italy Copa 19.1** Morelia Japa Lazzarini Tongue Made in Italy Copa 20+ Morelia II Japan Superleggera** Copa 20.1 Morelia Neo II (and TF) Superleggera 2.0 Copa Kapitan Morelia Neo III Beta MIJ* Copa Mundial Morelia Neo II K-Leather Mundial Goal Morelia Neo III Japan (and Indonesia) Mundial Team Morelia Zero Japan Predator 20+ Dragon Rebula 2 Japan Predator Accelerator Remake ZZ* Rebula 3 Japan King Platinum Predator Archive* Rebula 3 Elite King Platinum Laser Touch Predator Mania 19.1 ADV* Rebula 3 Pro King Pro Predator Mania 19+ ADV* Rebula Cup King Pro TT Predator Mania Remakes (2018 onward) Wave Cup*Predator Mania Remakes King Top Predator Precision Remake DB* Predator Precision Remake DB* One 5.1** World Cup One 19.1 Leather** World Cup One 20.1

Baggio 03 Italy OG Brasil Classic 442 Pro Brasil Italy OG Lunar Legend VII Elite 10R IC** Audazo V4 K-Leather IN Brasil K-Leather Mercurial Vapor 13 Elite Tech Craft* Furon V5 Pro Leather** Brasil Made in Italy K-Leather Pro Phantom Venom Elite Tech Craft* Furon V6 Pro Leather Golden Boy TF Premier II Tekela V1 Pro Leather** Maracana 18 Tiempo Legend 7 Elite** Tekela V2 Pro Leather Tiempo Legend 8 Elite

Stadio 100 II Stadio 300 II TF Stadio Made in Italy Medusæ III Elite Medusæ III Pro Speciali 98 pro * Special or limited edition ** Older model but currently available

Diadora announced it will stop using k-leather in soccer shoes by the end of 2020

© 2020 The Center for a Humane Economy Several investigators in California then attempted to purchase kangaroo leather cleats from manufacturers’ websites to assess compliance with the ban. They used their home addresses in the Los Angeles area.

Of the nine manufacturers’ websites, seven violate the law by selling and delivering kangaroo cleats to California addresses. Of the three dominant brands of soccer shoes – adidas, Nike and Puma – only adidas blocked the sale. Nike, the world’s largest athletic apparel manufacture with annual revenue of $34 billion, violated the California law despite being the only manufacturer to directly address the matter on its website. From the Nike.com Help section:

WHY ARE SOME SOCCER CLEATS NOT AVAILABLE FOR SHIPMENT TO CALIFORNIA?

The California Penal Code prohibits the sale of products made from, among other materials, kangaroo leather. Nike uses kangaroo leather in a limited number of our Premier and Tiempo soccer cleats. We will cancel all orders placed for these products with a California shipping address. Nike Mercurial, Hypervenom, Phantom Vision, and Magista soccer cleats can be shipped to California since they do not include kangaroo leather.

On January 16, 2020, the Center wrote to Nike CEO John Donahoe, trying to engage in a conversation to phase out kangaroo leather use in Nike’s shoes.

On February 2, a Center investigator ordered a pair of Nike Tiempo Legend 8 Elite soccer shoes that were delivered to her California address, demonstrating that www.nike.com was not complying with the law. The sale was documented and the shoes were returned (as in all cases).

On February 26, the Center spoke with Nike’s Shelly Hubbard of the Investor Relations team and Alex Hausman, Sustainable Reporting and Disclosure Director, alerting them to Nike’s noncompliance with the California ban. Ms. Hubbard said she would discuss with Nike’s legal team and reconnect with the Center.

On March 20, Center investigator Robert Ferber, former animal cruelty prosecutor for City of Los Angeles, ordered a pair of Tiempo Legend 8 Elite that was delivered. On May 5, he ordered a different kangaroo leather model, the Mercurial Vapor 13 Elite Tech Craft, that was also delivered.

On May 24, the Center attempted to reengage with Shelly Hubbard and Alex Hausman. There has been no response, but when Robert Ferber repeatedly attempted to purchase Tiempo Legend 8 Elite cleats

14 over the next several days, his orders were blocked.

On July 14, Robert Ferber ordered a pair of Tiempo Legend 8 Elite from the Nike website. The soccer cleats arrived at his Los Angeles residence on July 21. Nike’s compliance with state law was short-lived.

Table 3: Manufacturers Violating the Law From Their Websites

Brand Law Violation Model Purchased From Result

Adidas No Copa 19.1 adidas.com Blocked 2/20 Diadora Yes Brasil Italy K-Pro diadora.com Delivered 5/20 Lotto Yes Stadio 300 lotto.it/us Delivered 2/28 Mizuno No Neo KL MD mizunousa.com Blocked 3/13 New Balance Yes Furon V5 Pro newbalance.com Delivered 6/16 Nike Yes* Tiempo Legend 8 Elite nike.com Delivered 2/2, 3/20, 5/5, 7/20 Pantotola d’Oro Yes Superleggera 2.0 pantofoladoro.com Delivered 3/18 Puma Yes King Pro puma.com Delivered 2/27 Umbro Yes Speciali Pro umbropremier.com Delivered 3/7

*For a period this spring, Nike.com suspended direct sales of kangaroo leather soccer shoes to California consumers. Orders for Tiempo Legend 8 Elite were delivered to Center investigators in February, March and early May of this year. In late May, the Center’s orders were blocked. By July, Nike resumed illegal direct sales into California.

In addition to Nike, six other manufacturers violated the law by fulfilling orders placed by the Center’s California investigators: Diadora, Lotto, New Balance, Pantofola d ’Oro, Puma and Umbro. The Center has written to these manufacturers.

The Center found almost perfect compliance by manufacturers’ stores in California Four manufacturers operate factory stores throughout the state, often located in outlet malls. Featuring discounted and “value” merchandise, these stores do not appear to be a consistent channel for the brands’ more expensive kangaroo leather models. Store personnel at Nike and Puma said online returns to the store can explain the occasional presence of kangaroo leather cleats on their shelves (investigators found a single pair of kangaroo leather cleats at the Valencia Nike Factory Store).

When the Center investigated in the spring, the downtown San Francisco Nike Store sold kangaroo leather cleats. On a June 26 phone call, a store employee informed the Center that kangaroo leather cleats were no longer available and were being “returned to Nike HQ.”

Company # of Locations Sells Cleats Sell Kangaroo

adidas 29 Yes No Nike 36 Yes No* New Balance 15 Yes No Puma 15 Yes No*

*Online returns account for the occasional kangaroo leather soccer shoe available at these factory stores

16 The retailers of kangaroo leather soccer shoes

Profile of retailers

Using online search, maps, Yelp, social media, company websites, directories, phone calls and industry consultants, the Center identified retailers in California selling soccer cleats. They were grouped into two categories: Soccer Stores and National Chains.

Soccer Stores are independently owned brick-and-mortar specialty retailers that cater to soccer players with footwear, apparel, and equipment. Often located in suburban strip malls or secondary business districts, they can range from a single small “ma and pa” location to large, highly designed locations with elaborate signage and marketing. Some stores may have a Facebook Page or an e-commerce platform on their websites. Though independently owned, a dozen soccer stores in the state have a loose affiliation with a national franchisor like One Hundred Percent Soccer, Soccer City, Soccer Post or Soccer Store.

National Chains are large sporting goods corporations, often publicly traded, with locations throughout the country providing outfitting and equipment for a variety of sports. We include only the Sporting Goods chains that have enough of a selection to attract soccer shoe shoppers. (Factory outlet stores are considered above.)

Table 5: National Chains in California Selling Soccer Cleats - 370 Locations

Company Stores Law Violation Website Type Founded Phone

Big Five Sporting Goods 224 Yes big5sportinggoods.com Public 1997 (310) 536-0611 Dick’s Sporting Goods 58 No dickssportinggoods.com Public 1996 (724) 273-3400 Hibbett Sports 15 No hibbett.com Public 2007 (205) 942-4292 WSS 73 No shopwss.com Private 1985 (310) 532-6652

National Chains Mailing Addresses

Big Five Sporting Goods, 2525 El Segudo Blvd, El Segundo, CA 90245 Dick’s Sporting Goods, 345 Court Street, Coraopolis, PA 15109 Hibbett Sports, 2700 Milan Court, Birmingham, AL 35211 WSS, 879 West 190 Street #1200, Gardena, CA 90248

Big Five Sporting Goods is by far the largest sporting presence in California and does not sell kangaroo skin soccer cleats in its stores or online. Like the factory outlet stores mentioned earlier, Big Five inventory emphasizes affordable, entry and mid-level models of athletic shoes, including soccer cleats. While it sells numerous brands, Big Five does not stock the top tier of soccer shoes, which is typically where kangaroo models are positioned.

Dick’s Sporting Goods has an uneven approach to following the law. The Center found nearly a dozen California stores with kangaroo leather soccer shoes on their shelves. (In fact, a Center investigator purchased a pair of adidas Copa 20.1 at the Long Beach location in mid-July.) Yet the Center phoned a dozen other Dick’s stores to be told by associates and managers Dick’s does not stock kangaroo leather cleats, some referencing the California law. Because no one at the store level could reference a company policy, the Center made repeated attempts to reach California district managers and the corporate headquarters in Pennsylvania. The Center was contacted by a Dick’s supply chain consultant who said the news was “surprising,” but added he could not speak for the company.

Dick’s Sporting Goods sells kangaroo leather cleats at some but not all of its 58 California locations.

Hibbett Sport does not carry kangaroo leather soccer shoes in the state, though it offers a small selection online. The few Hibbett managers the Center spoke with were not familiar with the law prohibiting kangaroo products.

WSS has in the past sold kangaroo soccer cleats in its California stores and online, but today they cannot be found in either place.

18 Table 6: Soccer Stores in California - 117 Locations

Soccer Stores (117 Locations)

100 Percent Soccer (2) Leon Soccer Shop Soccer Nation & Faby’s Fashion A-1 Soccer Warehouse Mary & Joe’s Sporting Goods Soccer One Aggressive Soccer (2) Merced Soccer Shop Montclair Soccer Plus All Season Soccer Sports Soccer Post (2) Arza Soccer My Soccer Store Soccer Pro Asby Sports My Sport Soccer Santiago Azteca Soccer (2) Newport Soccer Store Soccer Shop USA (3) BK Sports Niky’s Sports (8) Soccer Shot Chula Vista Central Valley Soccer Store Pacific Soccer Soccer Store Century Soccer Commerce Planet Soccer Soccer Stores*(3) Classic Soccer Plus Pro Soccer Soccer USA Classic Soccer Shop Pro Soccer Inc. Soccer Wearhouse (4) Corona Sports Redlands Soccer Store Soccer World Dayak’s Den Soccer Salinas Futbol Central Soccerkraze (4) Deportes Azteca Sami’s Sports Soccerloco (3) Deportes Rabadan Soccer Action USA Solo Soccer Shop Deportes Salazar Soccer and Sport South Bay Soccer Shop El Fanta Sports Soccer Center Sports Page Soccer Wearhouse Elite Sport Soccer (2) Soccer City* (5) Sportsland Extreme Soccer & Rugby Soccer City La Puente Sunset Soccer Supply Fanaticos Soccer Express The Coliseum (3) Futbol Fanatics Soccer Express Inc. The Willow Soccer Glory Trading Soccer Garage Todo Deportes Soccer Store (2) Goetz Bros Soccer Junction Upland Soccer Store Kombat Soccer (2) Soccer Mart Valley Sport L 3 Soccer Store Soccer Mexico Xtreme Soccer (6) Leon Leather and Soccer Shop Soccer Mexico Enterprise

© 2020 The Center for a Humane Economy • There are 117 soccer stores in the state, owned by 85 businesses • 20% of those businesses have at least one additional store • 5% of the soccer stores in the state have not reopened after closing for the pandemic • 49% of soccer stores are in the Los Angeles area • 32% of soccer stores are in the San Francisco area • 19% of soccer stores are scattered throughout the state, from Chula Vista to Redding

Soccer Stores in the Los Angeles and San Francisco areas, catching 81% of the state’s soccer stores

20 Identifying sellers of kangaroo cleats

The Center used store visits (before and after stores closed for the pandemic), phone calls, websites, and other means to determine if a store is violating the law by selling kangaroo skin soccer shoes. A determination could be made for 111 of the 117 soccer stores in the state. Six stores have not reopened after closing for COVID-19.

To assist in the process of determining a store’s status, the Center mailed a letter to all soccer stores in the state, asking if they carried kangaroo leather cleats. Code 653 Do you need the symbol and little o here? was covered in the letter. The Center asked store owners to complete a survey at www.cleatsurvey.com. While few surveys were submitted, we received some instructive responses from owners eager to see the law enforced and “a more level playing field.”

Name Website Phone Email

Aggressive Soccer Facebook only (209) 577-1744 [email protected] Aggressive Soccer aggressive-soccer.com (805) 963-4919 [email protected] Arza Soccer aggressive-soccer.com (805) 351-0479 [email protected] BK Sports Facebook only (626) 337 3057 [email protected] Central Valley Soccer Store bksports.com (805) 499-4244 contact via website Classic Soccer Plus Facebook only (831) 770-0122 [email protected] Corona Sports No website or FB (818) 686-8089 contact via facebook Deportes Rabadan Facebook only (714) 776-6544 [email protected] Elite Sport Soccer elitesportsoccer.com (415).742.0803 [email protected] Elite Sport Soccer elitesportsoccer.com (415) 648-6007 [email protected] Kombat Soccer kombatsoccer.com (916) 391-3788 [email protected] Kombat Soccer kombatsoccer.com (916) 865-6469 [email protected] Leon Leather and Soccer Shop Facebook only (408) 564-8195 none found Mary & Joe’s Sporting Goods Facebook only (510) 525-1597 contact via facebook Merced Soccer Shop Facebook only (209) 455-3244 [email protected] Montclair Sports montclairsportsoakland.com (510)-339-9313 [email protected] Pacific Soccer Facebook only (909) 877-9439 [email protected] Soccer and Sport soccerandsports.com (707) 523-0991 victoria@soccerand sports.com Soccer City soccercityteam.com (916) 685-8837 [email protected] Soccer City La Puente Facebook only (626) 917-6508 [email protected] Soccer Express Facebook only (209) 724-0414 [email protected] Soccer Mexico Facebook only (760) 414-1187 contact via facebook Soccer Nation & Faby’s Fashion soccernationsl.com (510) 258-0729 [email protected] Soccer Santiago soccersantiago.com (714) 234-8234 [email protected] Soccer Store No website or FB (415) 571-7740 [email protected] Soccer Stores No website or FB (818) 832-1100 none found Soccer USA soccerusa.net (619) 282-8322 none found Soccerloco soccerloco.com (858) 715-6800 [email protected] Soccerloco soccerloco.com (619) 735-7770 [email protected] Soccerloco soccerloco.com (760) 579-7587 [email protected] Sportsland No website or FB (323) 804-0372 none found Upland Soccer Store Facebook only (909) 949-2999 none found Valley Sport Facebook only (760) 398-8664 [email protected]

22 Table 8: 78 Soccer Stores Disregard the Law

Name Website (or Facebook) Phone Email

100 Percent Soccer ohpsoccer.com (909) 599-9050 [email protected] 100 Percent Soccer ohpsoccer.com (909) 980-2423 [email protected] A-1 Soccer Warehouse Only Facebook (213) 617-0233 none found All Season Soccer allseasonsoccer.com (415) 408-5550 [email protected] Asby Sports asby.com (408) 259-6770 [email protected] Azteca Soccer aztecasoccer.com (909) 598-4798 [email protected] Azteca Soccer aztecasoccer.com (626) 444-1608 [email protected] Century Soccer Commerce century-sport.com (323) 887 0016 [email protected] Classic Soccer Shop theclassicsoccer.com (209) 365-9896 none found Deportes Salazar Facebook only (714) 543-9416 none found El Fanta Sports elfantasports.com (760) 393-0600 contact via website Extreme Soccer & Rugby extremesoccerstore.com (916) 973-1751 contact via website Fanaticos Facebook only (310) 699-9796 [email protected] Futbol Fanatics futbolfanatics.com (562) 745-4193 [email protected] Glory Trading No website of FB (213) 621-7736 none found Goetz Bros goetzsports.com (650) 249-4470 [email protected] L 3 Soccer Store l3soccer.store (707) 218-1437 [email protected] My Soccer Store mysoccerstore.com (818) 859-7544 [email protected] My Sport Facebook only (714) 731-7766 none found Newport Soccer Store Facebook only (949) 476-2244 [email protected] Niky’s Sports nikys-sports.com (323) 249-5445 [email protected] Niky’s Sports nikys-sports.com (562) 928-4300 [email protected] Niky’s Sports nikys-sports.com (661) 947-1188 [email protected] Niky’s Sports nikys-sports.com (310) 445-6570 [email protected] Niky’s Sports nikys-sports.com (213) 483-4154 [email protected] Niky’s Sports nikys-sports.com (747)-888-3299 [email protected] Niky’s Sports nikys-sports.com (323) 735-2181 [email protected] Niky’s Sports nikys-sports.com (562) 726-1956 [email protected] Planet Soccer planetsoccerstore.com (661) 253-1800 [email protected] Pro Soccer prosoccer.com (626) 403-9921 [email protected] Pro Soccer Inc. prosoccerinc.com (559) 299-5363 [email protected] Salinas Futbol Central salinasfutbolcentral.com (831) 751-9063 [email protected] Sami’s Sports Facebook only (323) 965-8093 [email protected]

Name Website (or Facebook) Phone Email

Soccer Action USA ohpsoccer.com (805) 614-4350 [email protected] Soccer City ohpsoccer.com (831) 443-9422 none found Soccer City Only Facebook (916) 414-8660 [email protected] Soccer City allseasonsoccer.com (209) 937-0390 none found Soccer City asby.com (530) 751-2161 [email protected] Soccer Express Inc. aztecasoccer.com (559 432-7511 [email protected] Soccer Garage aztecasoccer.com (800) 301-9042 [email protected] Soccer Junction century-sport.com (909) 590-5111 none found Soccer Mart theclassicsoccer.com (805) 473-8226 none found Soccer Mexico Enterprise Facebook only (916) 454-5786 none found Soccer One elfantasports.com (800) 297-6386 [email protected] Soccer Plus extremesoccerstore.com (626) 798-3783 [email protected] Soccer Post Facebook only (510) 523-5700 [email protected] Soccer Post futbolfanatics.com (925) 299-8800 [email protected] Soccer Pro No website of FB (650) 365-8282 none found Soccer Shop USA goetzsports.com (213) 749-0015 [email protected] Soccer Shop USA l3soccer.store (213) 680-2500 [email protected] Soccer Shop USA mysoccerstore.com (818) 376-1500 [email protected] Soccer Shot Chula Vista Facebook only (619) 271-5252 [email protected] Soccer Stores Facebook only (818) 243-7790 none found Soccer Stores nikys-sports.com (714) 542-7133 none found Soccer Wearhouse nikys-sports.com (951) 898-7622 [email protected] Soccer Wearhouse nikys-sports.com (951) 603-3099 [email protected] Soccer Wearhouse nikys-sports.com (714) 860-4277 [email protected] Soccer Wearhouse nikys-sports.com (951) 719-1155 [email protected] Soccer World nikys-sports.com (626) 652-9224 [email protected] Soccerkraze nikys-sports.com (530) 221-1515 [email protected] Soccerkraze nikys-sports.com (510) 494-9910 [email protected] Soccerkraze planetsoccerstore.com (408) 871-1744 [email protected] Soccerkraze prosoccer.com (831) 583-9094 [email protected] Solo Soccer Shop prosoccerinc.com (650) 872-6716 [email protected] Sports Page Soccer Wearhouse salinasfutbolcentral.com (714) 754-6760 [email protected] Sunset Soccer Supply Facebook only (415) 753-2666 [email protected]

24 Table 8: 78 Soccer Stores Disregard the Law (Continued)

Name Website (or Facebook) Phone Email

The Coliseum nvsoccer.com (707) 226-7069 [email protected] The Coliseum nvsoccer.com (415) 521-5273 [email protected] The Coliseum nvsoccer.com (707) 422-7702 [email protected] The Willow Soccer No website or FB (650) 326-6935 none found Todo Deportes Soccer Store Facebook only (213) 480-8807 none found Todo Deportes Soccer Store Facebook only (213) 321-1155 none found Xtreme Soccer xtremesocceronline.com (562) 421-2292 [email protected] Xtreme Soccer xtremesocceronline.com (310) 921-3609 [email protected] Xtreme Soccer xtremesocceronline.com (714) 223-1490 [email protected] Xtreme Soccer xtremesocceronline.com (805) 604-4707 [email protected] Xtreme Soccer xtremesocceronline.com (661) 836-1116 [email protected] Xtreme Soccer xtremesocceronline.com (805) 882-9231 [email protected]

Table 9: 6 Soccer Stores Have Not Reopened

Name Website (or Facebook) Phone Email

Dayak’s Den Soccer dayaksdensports.com (209) 833-8488 [email protected] Deportes Azteca Facebook only (916) 205-6081 contact via facebook Leon Soccer Shop Facebook only (510) 568-5731 none found Redlands Soccer Store Facebook only (909) 793-3987 [email protected] Soccer Center soccercenter.com (888) 697-6223 [email protected] South Bay Soccer Shop Facebook only (424) 456-7392 contact via yelp

Observations

Of the six largest and best-known soccer businesses in the state, only Soccerloco follows the law. The others -- Niky’s Sports (no relation to Nike), Soccer Wearhouse, SoccerKraze, The Coliseum and Xtreme Soccer -- are among the stores offering the greatest number of brands and models of kangaroo skin soccer shoes.

© 2020 The Center for a Humane Economy The Center was told that one of the brands was temporarily not selling their kangaroo leather soccer shoes into California, asking retailers to pick them up across the border in Nevada or Oregon. Similarly, Soccer Wearhouse advertises on its website for kangaroo leather shoes: “This cleat ships out from our Nevada Warehouse.” It is illegal to obtain kangaroo leather cleats from another state and sell them in California or to ship kangaroo leather cleats from out of state to California addresses.

Table 10: All California Retailers of Soccer Shoes

Name Comply Violate Number of Stores Companies

National Chains 85% 15% 370 Big 5, Dick’s, Hibbett, WSS Factory Stores 100% 0% 90 adidas, New Balance, Nike, Puma Soccer Stores 30% 70% 117 80 local businesses

26 Addresses for all 117 Independent Soccer Stores in California

Name Address City Zip

100 Percent Soccer 538 W Bonita Ave. San Dimas 91773 100 Percent Soccer 119545 Jack Benny Dr, Rancho Cucamonga 91739 A-1 Soccer Warehouse 458 South Alameda St Los Angeles 90013 Aggressive Soccer 1411 Crows Landing Rd Modesto 95351 Aggressive Soccer 835 N Milpas St #A Santa Barbara 93103 All Season Soccer 857 B Grant Ave Novato 94945 Arza Soccer 804 N Ventura Roaad Oxnard 93030 Asby Sports 392 North Capitol Ave San Jose 95133 Azteca Soccer 3580 W Temple Ave Pomona 91768 Azteca Soccer 11853 Valley Blvd El Monte 91732 BK Sports 316 Boyd St Los Angeles 90013 Central Valley Soccer Store 3773 Old Conejo Rd Newbury Park 91320 Century Soccer Commerce 6400 E Washington Blvd Los Angeles 90040 Classic Soccer Plus 176 E Laurel Drive Salinas 93906 Classic Soccer Shop 920 S Cherokee Ln Lodi 95240 Corona Sports 13687 Van Nuys Blvd Pacoima 91331 Dayak’s Den Soccer 320 W Larch Rd, #11 Tracy 95304 Deportes Azteca 6171 Stockton Blvd Sacramento 95824 Deportes Rabadan 842 N Euclid St Anaheim 92801 Deportes Salazar 1235 W 1st St SuiteB2 Santa Ana 92703 El Fanta Sports 49271 Grapefruit Blvd # 3 Coachella 92236 Elite Sport Soccer 1773 Haight St San Francisco 94117 Elite Sport Soccer 2637 Mission St San Francisco 94110 Extreme Soccer & Rugby 535 Fulton Ave Sacramento 95825 Fanaticos 10907 Venice Blvd Los Angeles 90034 Futbol Fanatics 2481 Pacidfic Ave #A Long Beach 90806 Glory Trading 325 S San Pedro St Los Angeles 90013 Goetz Bros 1125 Industrial Rd San Carlos 94070 Kombat Soccer 5958 S Land Park Dr Sacramento 95822 Kombat Soccer 1230 Sunset Blvd, #300 Rocklin 95765 L 3 Soccer Store 77 West 3ER St Santa Rosa 95401 Leon Leather & Soccer Shop 325 Keyes St San Jose 95112 Leon Soccer Shop 577 E 14th St San Leandro 94577

27 Addresses for all 117 Independent Soccer Stores in California (Continued)

Name Address City Zip

Mary & Joe’s Sporting Goods 911 San Pablo Ave Albany 94706 Merced Soccer Shop 946 W Main St Merced 95340 Montclair Sports 1970 Mountain Blvd Oakland 94611 My Soccer Store 916 W Burbank Blvd, #K Burbank 91506 My Sport 696 El Camino Real Tustin 92780 Newport Soccer Store 3400 Irvine Ave, #102 Newport Beach 92660 Niky’s Sports 3537 Tweedy Blvd South Gate 90280 Niky’s Sports 6365 Florence Ave Bell Gardens 90201 Niky’s Sports 830 W Avenue L, #105 Lancaster 93534 Niky’s Sports 11807 Santa Monica Blvd Los Angeles 90025 Niky’s Sports 1536 W 7th St Los Angeles 90017 Niky’s Sports 22105 Ventura Blvd Woodland Hills 91364 Niky’s Sports 2743 W Pico Blvd Los Angeles 90006 Niky’s Sports 4310 Atlantic Ave Long Beach 90807 Pacific Soccer 200 W Foothill Blvd Rialto 92376 Planet Soccer 24331 Main St Newhall 91321 Pro Soccer 82 N Los Robles Ave Pasadena 91101 Pro Soccer Inc. 6929 N Willow Ave Fresno 93710 Redlands Soccer Store 914 Orange St Redlands 92374 Salinas Futbol Central 7 Williams Rd Salinas 93905 Sami’s Sports 5215 1/2 W Adams Blvd Los Angeles 90016 Soccer Action USA 338 E Betteravia Rd Santa Maria 93454 Soccer and Sport 3774 Santa Rosa Ave Santa Rosa 95407 Soccer Center 259 E Redlands Blvd San Bernardino 92408 Soccer City 9663 E Stockton Blvd Elk Grove 95624 Soccer City 1032 N Davis Rd Salinas 93907 Soccer City 4391 Gateway Park Blvd Sacramento 95834 Soccer City 1120 Waterloo Rd #1 Stockton 95205 Soccer City 635 Plumas St Yuba City 95991 Soccer City La Puente 14316 Amar Rd, #C La Puente 91744 Soccer Express 1033 W Main St Merced 95340 Soccer Express Inc. 7975 N Blackstone Ave Freson 93720 Soccer Garage 31894 Plaza Drive, #B1 San Juan Capistrano 92675

28 Addresses for all 117 Independent Soccer Stores in California (Continued)

Name Address City Zip

Soccer Junction 12425 Mills Ave, #A4 Chino 91710 Soccer Mart 620 E Grand Ave Arroyo Grande 93420 Soccer Mexico 948 S Santa Fe Ave Vista 92084 Soccer Mexico Enterprise 5248 Fruitridge Rd Sacramento 95820 Soccer Nation/Faby’s Fashion 17279 Hesperian Blvd San Lorenzo 94580 Soccer One 7349 Canoga Avenue Canoga Park 91303 Soccer Plus 1640 E Washington Blvd Pasadena 91104 Soccer Post 2203 S Shore Center Alameda 94501 Soccer Post 3400 Mt Diablo Blvd Lafayette 94549 Soccer Pro 2737 El Camino Real Redwood City 94061 Soccer Santiago 10450 Beach Blvd, #113 Stanton 90680 Soccer Shop USA 3974 1/2 S Figueroa St Los Angeles 90037 Soccer Shop USA 458 S Alameda St Los Angeles 90013 Soccer Shop USA 7068 Van Nuys Blvd Van Nuys 91405 Soccer Shot Chula Vista 713 Broadway, #H Chula Vista 91910 Soccer Store 1189 Geneva Ave San Francisco 94112 Soccer Stores 7600 Balboa Blvd #111 Lake Balboa 91406 Soccer Stores 520 S Brand Blvd Glendale 91204 Soccer Stores 623 W 17th St Santa Ana 92706 Soccer USA 6612 Mission Gorge Rd #A San Diego 92120 Soccer Wearhouse 12762 Limonite Ave Eastvale 92880 Soccer Wearhouse 2795 Cabot Dr Space 6-150 Corona 92883 Soccer Wearhouse 400 W Disney Way #149 Anaheim 92802 Soccer Wearhouse 41377 Margarita Rd Temecula 92591 Soccer World 2146 Durfee Ave South El Monte 91733 Soccerkraze 1374 Hilltop Dr Redding 96003 Soccerkraze 5825 Jarvis Ave Newark 94560 Soccerkraze 797 W Hamilton Ave Campbell 95008 Soccerkraze 1121 Military Ave Monterey 93955 Soccerloco 3755 Murphy Canyon Rd #L San Diego 92123 Soccerloco 4430 Camino De La Plaza San Ysidro 92173 Soccerloco 5617 Paseo Del Norte Carlsbad 92008 Solo Soccer Shop 238 Grand Ave South San Francisco 94080

29 Addresses for all 117 Independent Soccer Stores in California (Continued)

Name Address City Zip

South Bay Soccer Shop 4327 W 147th St Lawndale 90260 Sportspage Soccer Warehouse 18170 Euclid St Fountain Valley 92708 Sportsland 730 S Alvarado St Los Angeles 90057 Sunset Soccer Supply 3401 Irving St San Francisco 94122 The Coliseum 2532 Jefferson St Napa 94559 The Coliseum 3815 Redwood Hwy San Rafael 94903 The Coliseum 1595 Holiday Ln, #B2 Fairfield 94534 The Willow Soccer 728 Willow Rd #B Menlo Park 94025 Todo Deportes Soccer Store 2725 W 6th St Los Angeles 90057 Todo Deportes Soccer Store 1816 W 6th St Los Angeles 90057 Upland Soccer Store 1651 W Foothill Blvd #J Upland 91786 Valley Sport 51335 Harrison St #104 Coachella 92236 Xtreme Soccer 12017 E Carson St Hawaiian Gardens 90716 Xtreme Soccer 19019 Hawthorne Blvd Torrance 90503 Xtreme Soccer 2142 E Lincoln Ave Anaheim 92806 Xtreme Soccer 2377 N Oxnard Blvd Oxnard 93036 Xtreme Soccer 3900 California Ave #300 Bakersfield 93309 Xtreme Soccer 401 N Milpas St Santa Barbara 93103

30 E-commerce websites selling kangaroo leather soccer shoes

American shoppers rang up $601 billion in online sales for 2019, a 15% increase from the year before. Since then, online shopping and website traffic have increased dramatically. Considering 16% of all retail sales happens online, retailers are increasing their focus on e-commerce. This includes soccer shoe sellers.

Depending on their compliance with the California statute, online retailers could account for a considerable amount of kangaroo leather being sold into the state. The Center set out to identify online retailers that a shopper in California would most readily encounter when searching for soccer cleats and to determine if these websites take steps to avoid breaking the law.

To assemble the list of the predominant sellers of kangaroo leather soccer cleats, the Center utilized the search and shopping feature of several search engines and platforms; examined website traffic, ranking and comparison data; tracked paid placements; visited athlete and fan gathering places; and consulted with soccer retailers and devotees.

E-retailers selling kangaroo leather soccer cleats included soccer portals that exist only online (Soccer. Com, ProDirect Soccer), big box stores and sporting good chains (Walmart and Dick’s), on-line behemoths (Amazon and Zappos), and local soccer stores that have parlayed brick-and-mortar locations into strong e-commerce sites (We Got Soccer, The Soccer Factory, Soccerloco).

To meet the criteria for inclusion, the e-tailer needed to offer kangaroo leather cleats and shipping to California. One of America’s largest websites for soccer shoes, Academy Sports, will not ship to California due to the state’s stringent hazardous materials disclosure requirements. A leading Canadian sporting goods website, Sport Chek, won’t ship south. For websites outside of the US, we ensured a California shopper would not have problems with payment or shipping, hence the inclusion of websites from Canada, the UK, Spain and Australia.

We eliminated peer-to-peer marketplaces like Bonanza, eBay, Facebook Marketplace, Goat, Mercari, Poshmark, and Swap, since the inventory isn’t stable, transactions are infrequent, violators are individuals likely unfamiliar with California law rather than businesses with higher expectations. Websites of manufacturers like adidas and Nike were examined in greater detail and are addressed separately.

In assembling the list, investigators captured contact information and links to specific kangaroo leather shoes. They looked for any type of warning or disclaimer regarding the California law on product pages, in the Terms of Service, or at check-out. Finally, to test for address blocking they used a California shipping address and tried purchasing the shoes, going to the point of entering a credit card.

Ultimately, the Center compiled a list of 76 online retailers. These websites were divided into two groups: those that appear to make no effort to comply with the law, and those that acknowledge the law in some manner. 31 Table 11: 65 Online Retailers That Do Not Acknowledge the California Law (Continued)

Name Website (or Facebook) Phone Email

Soccer Corner soccercorner.com (800) 814-4916 [email protected] Soccer X soccerx.com (866) 942-6605 [email protected] Soccer Garage soccergarage.com (800) 301-9042 [email protected] Soccer Internationale soccerinternationale.net (402) 330-9862 form on website Soccer Locker soccerlocker.com (866) 957-6223 [email protected] Soccer Master soccermaster.com (636) 386-8000 [email protected] Soccer One soccerone.com (800) 297-6386 [email protected] Soccer Plus USA soccerplususa.com (844) 842-3827 [email protected] Soccer Post soccerpost.com (732) 935-0990 [email protected] Soccer Premier thesoccerstore.com (972) 484-8282 [email protected] Soccer Shop USA soccershopusa.com (213) 617-0233 form on website Soccer Unlimited USA soccerunlimitedusa.com (518) 458-8236 [email protected] Soccer Village soccervillage.com (800) 483-2690 [email protected] Soccer Wearhouse soccerwearhouse.com (800) 892-6979 [email protected] Soccer Zone Vegas soccerzonevegas.com (702) 456-4625 [email protected] Soccer4All soccer4all.com (281) 499-6665 [email protected] SoccerEvolution soccerevolution.com (800) 949-4625 [email protected] Stefans Soccer stefanssoccer.com (262) 789-7800 [email protected] Suley’s Soccer suleyssoccer.com (603) 668-7227 [email protected] Training Rack trainingrack.com (770) 458-7815 [email protected] Tursi Soccer tursissoccer.com (503) 297-2241 form on website u90 Soccer u90soccer.com (516) 450-3817 form on website Unisport unisportstore.com (453) 325-4040 [email protected] VSAthletics vsathletics.com (800) 676-7463 [email protected] Walmart walmart.com (479) 273-4000 form on website We Got Soccer wegotsoccer.com (800) 974-4625 [email protected] Every Sport for Less everysportforless.com (800) 282-8438 [email protected] Play Soccer playsoccerinc.com (866) 755-2361 [email protected] Third Coast Soccer thirdcoastsoccer.net (844) 811-6010 [email protected] Euromex Sports euromexsports.com (718) 439-5105 [email protected] Avon Sports avonsportsapparel.com (317) 272-3831 [email protected]

Name Website (or Facebook) Phone Email

6pm.com 6pm.com (888) 676-2660 [email protected] or chat via website Amazon amazon.com (888) 280-4331 [email protected] Dicks Sporting Goods dickssportinggoods.com (877) 846-9997 form on website Hibbett Sports hibbett.com (205) 942-4292 [email protected] Rev Up Sports revupsports.com (855) 812-1854 [email protected] Soccer Magic soccermagicdiscounts.com (610) 443-2300 [email protected] Soccer Pro soccerpro.com (877) 762-7776 [email protected]; president. Soccer.com soccer.com (800) 950-1994 [email protected] The Soccer Factory thesoccerfactory.com (800) 987-6223 form on website Ultimate Soccer Store ultimatesoccerstore.com (561) 757-3465 [email protected] World Soccer Shop worldsoccershop.com (800) 277-7255 [email protected] Zappos zappos.com (800) 927-7671 [email protected]

Online retailers’ compliance

Of the 76 predominant online retailers: • 86 percent do not acknowledge the California law • 16 percent post warnings about the law • 7percent block California shoppers from obtaining kangaroo shoes

86 percent of websites accept California addresses for shipment

The majority of websites appear to not comply with the law prohibiting the sale of kangaroo products to California buyers. On 65 websites, nothing alerts California shoppers to the ban or appears to stop them from making illegal purchases. Because both importing and selling kangaroo products are illegal, customers as well as sellers violate the law when prohibited transactions occur.

However, the Center cannot say definitively that these websites will break the law when California customers come shopping. A site might cancel an order after payment is accepted, as was the case for adidas.com, or block the sale to a California address when a customer clicks on “place my order.” Investigators did not submit payment and test whether kangaroo leather soccer cleats would be delivered from these 76 online sellers.

Company Law Violation Appearing Warning Language

6pm Yes Usually Please note that due to the use of kangaroo leather in this product and restrictions under California law, we are unable to ship this style to addresses in California. Amazon No Always This item cannot be shipped to your selected location.

Dick’s Sporting Goods Yes Sometimes Items containing kangaroo leather — The sale or shipment of this product to residents of the following is restricted: California

Hibbett Sports No Always Not available for shipping to California.

Rev Up Sports No Always These cleats cannot be shipped to California due to the kangaroo leather.

Soccer.com No Usually This product contains k-leather and is not available for sale or shipment to California. Please see our Terms of Use

Soccer Magic Yes Never No warning on product page, but in Terms of Service

Soccer Pro Yes Usually This product contains k-leather and is not available for sale or shipment to California

The Soccer Factory Yes Usually This product contains k-leather and is not available for sale or shipment to California.

Ultimate Soccer Store Yes Rarely This product contains k-leather and is not available for sale or shipment to California. Please see our Terms of Use.

World Soccer Shop No Usually This product contains k-leather and is not available for sale or shipment to California. Please see our Terms of Use.

Zappos Yes Sometimes Please note that due to the use of kangaroo leather in this product and restrictions under California law, we are unable to ship this style to addresses in California.

These seven online retailers typically had three main failings with 1) inconsistent application of the California warning, 2) lack of prominence of the warning, and 3) failure to block the transaction.

• 6pm is the discount arm of Zappos, with both owned by Amazon. Like Zappos, 6pm has a strong selection of kangaroo leather soccer shoes, but typically at lower prices. Appearing about half the time, the California warning is displayed when the product description uses kangaroo leather but not with k-leather. Both Zappos and 6pm use the same strong, bold California warning, the most prominent of

• Dick’s Sporting Goods is one of the most popular sites carrying soccer shoes, with 38 million monthly views. The California warning is buried and appears only one-third of the time. After a model and size are selected, a link to Shipping restrictions may apply appears, which when clicked gives information on the California ban. The shipping link appears on models described as kangaroo leather, but not as k-leather. Address blocking worked for two out of six attempts. The Center ordered and received a pair of Puma King Pro kangaroo leather soccer cleats. Purchase completed.

• Soccer Magic has a physical store in Pennsylvania and a strong virtual store with a large selection of kangaroo leather soccer shoes. None of the product pages display the California warning but, curiously, the website duplicates word-for-word the Soccer.com Terms of Service, including the paragraph about the site’s strict adherence to the California law. The Center ordered and received pair of adidas Copa 19.1 kangaroo leather soccer cleats. Purchase completed.

• Soccer Pro operates one of the most-visited soccer specialty e-commerce sites online, in addition to a store in Missouri. A California warning is camouflaged within the text of individual product descriptions and appears for 21 out of 30 kangaroo leather shoes. The warning is so arbitrarily applied that, even within the same model of shoe, one color brings up the California warning while a different color does not. The Center ordered and received a pair of adidas Mundial Team kangaroo leather soccer cleats. Purchase completed.

• The Soccer Factory has three stores in Texas to augment a strong e-commerce platform, selling a wide range of soccer cleats from four manufacturers. The California warning displays for less than two out of every three kangaroo leather cleats offered. The Center ordered and received a pair of adidas Copa Mundial kangaroo leather soccer shoes, confirming that address blocking is not in place. The Center ordered and received a pair of Puma King Pro kangaroo leather soccer cleats. Purchase completed.

• Ultimate Soccer Store has four stores in Florida and Texas and offers four kangaroo leather models of soccer shoes from three brands on its website. Only one model displays a California warning, which is prominent. The Center determined address blocking does not occur by purchasing a pair of adidas Mundial Team indoor kangaroo leather soccer shoes. The Center ordered and received a pair of Puma King Pro kangaroo leather soccer cleats. Purchase completed.

• Zappos has perhaps the best California warning of any of the websites, grabbing attention as the

© 2020 The Center for a Humane Economy second bullet point in a shoe’s product description, offset with a big and bold font. The warning appears on half of the kangaroo soccer shoes, catching all the adidas models described as kangaroo leather, but missing all the Puma models described as k-leather. Zappos is the opposite of its owner Amazon. Amazon has no California warning but excellent address blocking. Zappos has an excellent California warning (if unevenly applied) but no address blocking. The Center ordered and received a pair of adidas Copa Mundial kangaroo leather soccer cleats. Purchase completed.

In successfully blocking California addresses, these five online retailers observe the California law.

• Amazon With one of the largest selections of soccer cleats online, Amazon does not post a California warning on its shoe product pages, but it unfailingly prevents the sale of kangaroo cleats to shoppers in California through address blocking at checkout. Without explanation, another shipping address is requested. An arduous click trail on the website eventually leads to a reference about kangaroo products and § 653o. This effective address blocking policy applies to cleats sold and shipped by Amazon, cleats sold by third parties and shipped by Amazon, and cleats sold and shipped by third parties. Purchase blocked.

• Hibbett Sports does not sell kangaroo cleats in any of its 15 California stores, but they offer a few models online. The California warning appears on two of three models and is easy to overlook. Address blocking to California was successful in attempts to order each of the three shoes. Purchase blocked.

• Rev Up Soccer runs a sporting goods store in Tennessee in addition to an e-store. Among its many dozens of cleats there are two kangaroo models. Its California warning is one of the best. Prominently placed in all capital letters, it is meant to be noticed. When the Center attempted to purchase a pair of adidas Copa Mundial kangaroo leather cleats, the sale seemed to go through, but hours later an email arrived cancelling the order, refunding the purchase and specifically citing the California law. Purchase blocked.

• Soccer.com is the biggest soccer specialty store online, with 680,000 monthly views and a huge selection of cleats. A subsidiary of North Carolina-based Sports Endeavors, with sister sites in different sports, it takes § 653o seriously. A paragraph devoted to compliance with the kangaroo ban appears in the Terms of Service. The California warning appears as the final bullet point in the shoe descriptions 80 percent of the time (24 out of 30 shoes). Address blocking worked every time, triggering a generic “out of stock” message. Purchase blocked.

• World Soccer Shop became a sister site of Soccer.com when acquired by Sports Endeavors and has a

© 2020 The Center for a Humane Economy very similar site with subtle difference is pricing and product descriptions. Like Soccer.com, the Terms of Service contains a paragraph devoted to § 653o, and the California warning appears on 80 percent of kangaroo leather soccer shoes. Address blocking is solidly in place for attempted sales to California. Purchase blocked.

A note about eBay, which has a vibrant market in kangaroo leather goods. Californians buying or selling kangaroo leather cleats on the platform are violating eBay’s policies. Though it requires the daunting click trail of Policies>Our Policies>Animals Products Policy>California Laws>California Penal Code Section 639- 653.2, the California kangaroo parts ban can be found. Enforcement (administrative remedies) may occur if community members flag the potential violation.

California is a sentinel state, its legislature routinely shaping national policy with first-on-the-books laws on issues as disparate as emissions standards, gig workers, offshore drilling, and health care. In the animal protection arena, California legislators have pioneered laws that ban lead ammunition for hunting, trapping for fur, wild animals in circus acts – and the sale of kangaroo products.

But the state’s application of its prohibition on the trade in kangaroo parts has been, to say the least, uneven. Bowing to pressure from the commercial kangaroo-killing industry and some end-users of the skins, California suspended the law for a time. It has been in place during the last four years, though, and has gone unchallenged. Laws are not statements or exhortations – they are to be applied and enforced.

While the legislature has proven determined and foresighted on animal welfare, California’s influence also comes from its heft: 40 million residents (1 of every 8 Americans) and an economy that recently eclipsed Britain to be the fifth largest in the world.

The state’s presence in the soccer world is similarly outsized. California has the most Major League Soccer teams, produces the most professional players, has the most soccer participants (college, youth, and recreation) and the most soccer spectators of any state in the country. Websites and magazines regularly crown LA “America’s Top Soccer City.” California has the highest consumer spending on soccer of all US cities, certain to reach new heights with the World Cup coming in 2026.

When Australia was strongly intervening in the legislative process to eliminate California’s kangaroo ban, for which it was fined and condemned in editorials here and at home, it published a monograph* that reads:

California is the largest market in the US for high quality sporting shoes, especially soccer boots. Many of these are made with kangaroo leather. The US is the largest market in the world for such sporting goods. Hence it is essential for ongoing kangaroo industry development that there is uninhibited access to this market.

It is clear from this publication that the Australian government viewed the California legislation as a bellwether, writing that having access to the California market is “critical to ongoing kangaroo industry development, both in terms of the level of actual trade with them, but more so, in their global significance.”

While dwindling kangaroo populations first spurred California legislators to impose the ban 50 years ago, it’s the inhumanity of killing kangaroos in their native habitat that drove the ban’s reinstatement 46 years later. Yet the California Department of Fish and Wildlife chose inaction, ignoring the law and undermining the will of the people, represented through their elected officials.

And choosing to not enforce the law they certainly are. There is no black or gray market in kangaroo cleats. They are out in plain sight, in eye-catching displays, sporting tags advertising their kangaroo leather content.

The Department conducts tightly orchestrated high-profile raids to confiscate ivory from galleries and auction houses, but this challenge is almost too simple. By writing letters and press releases, speaking to store owners and manufacturers’ reps, and issuing citations for the most recalcitrant offenders, the Department can mop up this problem readily. There is no illicit, underground trade in kangaroo parts driven by poachers and wildlife traffickers. The people using kangaroo skins are major corporations, with compliance officers and boards of directors. If they are merely reminded of their illegal action, they should respond.

Tens of thousands of kangaroo leather soccer shoes continue to flow into the state annually while Fish and Wildlife officials stand aside. The commercial shooting of kangaroos – at night with spotlights, then field dressed, stored in a chiller and eventually driven to a processing plant to bring less than 25 cents per pound – is not hunting. It’s as if we licensed 300 shooters to kill 1.5 million elk in our wildlands to sell abroad for boots or hats.

Commodifying wildlife and commercializing their killing is not popular with Californians, and it is at odds with the wildlife management principles put into practice throughout the United States.

As evidenced by what’s on professional soccer players’ feet, today’s state-of-the-art soccer cleats are high- tech, computer-designed, and synthetic. They are the most popular and purchased soccer shoe, across price points. Kangaroo skin shoes, with old school appeal and throwback profiles, are a relic but given the popularity of the sport, even a modest segment of soccer enthusiasts buying these shoes creates the demand for the skins of millions of kangaroos. As Nike says, kangaroo leather is found “only on a small number of models in one of four silos.” Retailers and manufacturers will not be harmed if kangaroo leather

On occasion the California legislature enacts a law that has far-reaching impact. That’s the reality in a world where supply chains are long and in far-flung places where regulation and oversight are ineffectual. California’s lawmakers uphold the values of the people of California. They don’t want to see kangaroos killed for shoes, and most of them have no idea that they may be buying footwear that comes from the mass slaughter of native wildlife.

Australia’s monograph opposing the California law banning sales of kangaroo products included a dire warning:

(M)ajor producers had indicated that if they cannot sell kangaroo leather soccer boots in California, then they may not produce them at all.

The government’s hyperbole may have been intended just to convey a sense of urgency. But as the state legislature has proven in the past, “As goes California….”

After several month of research, The Center for a Humane Economy has identified specific businesses responsible for the import and sale of tens of thousands of kangaroo skin soccer shoes In California, violating California Penal Code § 653o. Those businesses include:

• 9 manufacturers wholesaling into the state • 7 manufacturers selling online and shipping to California shoppers • 71 dominant e-commerce websites selling and shipping to California shoppers • 78 soccer stores selling to shoppers • 1 national sporting goods chain selling to shoppers

In this report we have provided contact information for each violator: name, address, phone number, email and website, as they are discoverable.

We are forwarding our research to the Department of Fish and Wildlife and other state agencies and officials in the hope that they will contact these businesses as a first step in enforcing the law, seeking voluntary compliance.

The Center is not aware of any communication from state officials to soccer store owners four years ago or at any time since then, explaining the change in the law. No official or agency has asked retailers to follow the law. Without worrying about enforcement, it has been left to the individual’s business ethics and personal conscience.

Absent that instruction, it’s understandable that some retailers would think they can get away with law-breaking. Had the delineation between legal and illegal been made clear and a new tone set by the authorities, things might have been different.

Still, there can be little doubt that store owners have been aware of the reinstatement of the ban on sales of kangaroo products. Some owners might have been involved in the debate, lobbying for one position or another. Others may have followed it more casually through the media, trade groups, soccer websites or word of mouth.

The national chains operate differently than smaller independent retailers. With in-house attorneys and

© 2020 The Center for a Humane Economy required to obey a wide range of state regulations, they are less likely to take their chances with ignoring the law. That might explain the generally sound compliance by the national chains, but there is another possible answer. Most of the chains follow the discount model and have never carried top tier cleats. As for the websites, after a few months of notices, Nike did temporarily halt the direct-to-California illegal selling. But as quickly as it stopped, Nike resumed kangaroo skin shoe sales to Californians, even though the Center has had multiple personal communications with corporate leaders there.

Among the other online retailers, there are big and small companies trying to comply with the law, and big and small companies flouting the law. When retailers understand adherence is not discretionary, and someone is keeping track, they will likely make the necessary adjustments to be in good standing, given the size of the California market.

It all begins with the officials charged with enforcing this law making it a priority, changing their mindset and getting to work.

The Center for a Humane Economy has ten recommendations for California authorities:

1. California Department of Fish and Wildlife should appoint an enforcement official, for a short period, to orchestrate an enforcement plan: Appointing the appropriate person of authority to coordinate increased enforcement of § 653o and organizing a task force will create efficiencies and quicker progress.

2. Communicate with retailers: Write letters to stores explaining the law and encouraging voluntary compliance. Direct communication from authorities will bring clarity and motivation.

3. Communicate with manufacturers: Write to manufacturers and speak with local sales representatives to stop wholesaling to retailers and selling to consumers on their websites. Corporations have legal teams and computer programmers to swiftly implement best practices.

4. Communicate with online retailers: Publish guidance for how online retailers can best comply with § 653o, and follow up to monitor compliance.

5. Statewide and local: Coordinate with local law enforcement including Humane Officers to educate soccer stores about § 653o and, if necessary, report noncompliance. Our research found local authorities were unclear on key aspects of this law and its enforcement.

7. Media: Use social media and engage with news media through press releases to educate the public about the law.

8. Talk to marketplace platforms: Open a dialogue with e-commerce platforms that offer marketplaces, like eBay, to understand how to best achieve the intent of § 653o.

9. Encourage enforcement: Legislators could pass a Resolution or earmarked funding measure; the Attor- ney General could offer a legal opinion as encouragement

10. Leadership: Local and law enforcement may be looking for political leadership to begin fully imple- menting this law. We call on the Governor, agency heads, leading lawmakers and others to give strong guidance to California’s frontline enforcement officers. It is long overdue.

What’s wrong with kangaroo leather?

In rural areas and under cover of darkness kangaroos, Australia’s iconic animals, are killed by a profit-driven industry to make kangaroo skin goods like soccer cleats, with more than a million kangaroo skins exported each year to countries worldwide.

The widespread removal of Australia’s largest herbivore has major implications for the country’s ecological resilience. Over the last decade more than 18.2 million adult kangaroos were recorded as being killed for commercial purposes.

The commercial killing of kangaroos is permitted for four species on the mainland of Australia including the Red Kangaroo (Macropus rufus), Eastern Grey Kangaroo (M. Giganteus), Western Grey Kangaroo (M. fuliginosus) and Wallaroo (M. robustus). The commercial killing of other species in the macropod family such as Bennet’s wallaby and pademelons occurs in Tasmania.

Ethical concerns

Although the government’s Codes of Conduct require kangaroos to be shot in the brain, many are “body shot,” meaning they are wounded but not killed instantaneously. These animals are likely to suffer slow and incredibly painful deaths from gunshot wounds. When an adult female is shot she may have a joey or young kangaroo who is dependent on her for survival. Shooters are instructed to ‘euthanize’ the joeys of any slaughtered female with either a single blow to the head or a single shot to the brain or heart. The ‘single forceful blow to the base of the skull’ can be achieved with a blunt object such as a metal pipe or by swinging the young animal’s head against a car’s tow bar.

A government report (Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation) investigated the fate of joeys after their mothers were killed and found the majority of dependent at-foot joeys had not been euthanized by shooters but were instead left in the field, taking up to ten days to die from starvation, exposure or predation without their mothers to teach them vital survival skills.

Compounding the welfare concerns associated with the killing of kangaroos for commercial purposes are issues with enforcement of laws and prosecutions for offences. The authorities responsible for monitoring the industry and ensuring animal welfare are also responsible for promoting the industry. This conflict of interest often results in the prioritization of the industry agenda over animal welfare. The slaughter of kangaroos is virtually unmonitored in the field and consequently the Codes are rarely enforced.

Shooting occurs at night in remote and regional areas far from the scrutiny of government regulatory agencies and the general public. There are a limited number of inspectors. For example, in New South Wales, the Office of Environment and Heritage has only one inspector for the state’s 309,000 square miles.

Ecological concerns

The commercial industry promotes itself as sustainable by imposing a shooting quota set by the government of between 14 and 20 percent of the estimated population for the four kangaroo species. These quotas allow for an annual kill of between 3.6 and 8.3 million kangaroos. However, population estimates are very imprecise.

Given the vast size of Australia, population surveys are conducted aerially using a fixed-wing aircraft or helicopter. But kangaroos are hard to spot, as vegetation can obscure sight and kangaroos like to relax in the shade during the day. Therefore, the government uses a “correction factor” assuming for every kangaroo sighted there may be seven or ten unseen.

The problem with correction factors is their tendency to inflate kangaroo population estimates. In addition, scientists have raised concerns that with population growth rates averaging a maximum of 10% across kangaroo species in good conditions, shooting quotas are too high to maintain viable populations. While the total number of kangaroos killed for commercial purposes declined slightly between 2010 and 2018 with an average of 1.57 million adult kangaroos killed annually (Department of the Environment and Energy, 2019), the total allowable “take” quota increased by almost 70% between 2010 and 2016 to make it appear the killing is within sustainable levels.

Consequently, some locations are being depleted of kangaroos, now facing localized extinction. In the state of South Australia, Red Kangaroo numbers declined by more than 39% from 2018 to 2019. In the Northeast commercial zone in South Australia, Wallaroo numbers declined by 92% since 2017 and West- ern Grey Kangaroos declined by 77% from 2018 to 2019. In Queensland, the 2020 commercial kill in two

It is unknown what the cumulative impacts of severe drought, extreme heat, and widespread fires causing wildlife deaths and habitat destruction on a massive scale will be on kangaroo populations. The “sustainable harvest quotas” are intended to ensure conservation of kangaroo populations. Clearly the intention differs from reality.

More information on the killing of kangaroos can be found on www.kangaroosarenotshoes.com.

From: Phoebe Lenhart Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 1:29 PM To: FGC ; Lehr, Stafford@Wildlife ; Fresz, Shawn@Wildlife ; Stoddard, Jeffrey@Wildlife ; Bartlett, Tina@Wildlife ; Burkholder, Brad@Wildlife ; Gardner, Scott@Wildlife ; Denryter, Kristin@Wildlife ; Roger Gitlin Subject: Roosevelt elk, FGC meeting August 18-19, 2020. Agenda item #2 (the DFW stated that the Roosevelt elk are not an item on the agenda)

Dear FGC and Mr. Stafford Lehr,

You may not be pleased to hear from me again, it appears necessary due to deliberate deception by the DFW's staff during the Del Norte County (DNC) Board of Supervisors (BOS) meeting on July 14, 2020. Supervisor Roger Gitlin (1:09 hours) asked a DFW staff how many Roosevelt elk are in DNC? The reply from this DFW staff was "minimum count, 1,500" Roosevelt elk. The DFW staff misled the DNC BOS (and the public) with false population statistics. The DFW"S own biologist, Ms. C Hilson, has counted and reported to the DFW 404 Roosevelt elk living in DNC (NOT 1,500). I send this E-mail requesting that the DFW not only publicly apologize for deceiving the BOS, but also to insist on immediate retraction of this erroneous statement made by DFW staff promptly! For the record, I request that the correct population of 404 Roosevelt elk is given.

For accurate data on the Roosevelt elk, I refer the DFW and the BOS to a report published by the Redwood National and State parks, "2018 Herd Unit Classification and Management of Roosevelt Elk" (K Schmidt, October 2019). The population statistics in this report, basically confirm the findings of Ms. Hilson; there are a few hundred Roosevelt elk in northwest CA (NOT 1,500 elk in DNC). In addition, this professional research documents include the ratio of calves per cows (overall declining percentage) and the bull: cow ratio (in precipitous decline since 2012).

Also, it is important for the DFW to specify that of these 404 Roosevelt elk, an estimated 200 elk are calves and spikes (immature bulls); indicating that there are instead, approximately 200 mature elk in DNC. This is such a small number, that I believe it puts the Roosevelt elk at risk for extinction! The DFW should know that this population of Roosevelt elk is very marginal, yet this concern is never addressed. Rather, the DFW approves tags to hunt more and more Roosevelt elk in DNC every year. The arrival of the TAHD threatens the vulnerability of our fragmented, small herds.

Research at Washington State University (WSU) confirms that the TAHD infected elk ("limping" due to the debilitating pain caused by the TAHD disease) do NOT make for successful breeders. Both the bulls and the cows are incapacitated, thus, the birth rate of calves declines. According to WSU, up to 90% of the Roosevelt elk in a herd can have some stage of development of TAHD.

Further, the FGC and Mr. Lehr, according to DFW staff, there are no plans to curtail hunting permits in DNC (1:11 hours); yet, there are only approximately 200 mature Roosevelt elk (among 9 herds, per Ms. Hilson). Among those, it appears that 30 Roosevelt elk, per DFW staff, are under "surveillance" for TAHD. The DFW staff stated that the DFW has the ability to limit the pressure on herds if the DFW staff "FEELS" a need to do so (1:06 hours).

I would like to remind the DFW and the FGC that wildlife management is NOT a "feely" subject, it is a science. Good stewardship is not based on "feely" decisions, it is based upon science. Obviously, if this DFW staff does not "feel" a need to restrict hunting pressure this year (with 30 Roosevelt elk under "surveillance" for TAHD); then, he states that he won't. I take issue with the DFW staff and whether the DFW "feels" like protecting our healthy cows and bulls. Again, I think the DFW is taking the wrong approach (which I have observed the DFW as having a history of doing so over the past 5 years). It is as basic as attending to the research at WSU.

It is critical to many of us that the DFW staff protect the healthy elk from hunters. It appears to me that the DFW staff is more concerned about the satisfaction of "happy hunters", than the consideration of the welfare of our suffering Roosevelt elk. By comments made during the DNC BOS presentation, the DFW exhibits more sympathy for the hunters (who want to kill trophy elk), than empathy for the Roosevelt elk suffering from this painful TAHD. This warped mentality is unacceptable. Is it any coincidence that the DFW has accepted $243, 227 from the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (RMEF) and has more affiliation with them, than with the public and tourists who enjoy viewing our Roosevelt elk (which apparently were healthy, now, they are at risk of death)?

The DFW staff stated concern about "population density" (1:07 hours). Obviously, the CA DFW does not know anything about the history of the arrival of the Roosevelt elk in North American, 35,000 years ago. Before the discovery of CA by the white man in the 1800's, Roosevelt elk traveled in herds in the "hundreds of thousands". The Roosevelt elk did not suffer and die from TAHD 200 years ago. The Roosevelt elk need competent scientific management, not "feely" regulations.

In addition, the FGC and Mr. Lehr, tragically there are reports from reliable sources that the TAHD has spread to Roosevelt elk herds in Orick. That indicates to me that the TAHD arrived in DNC much earlier then in 2019; it is possible that the TAHD has been in CA for at least 2-3 years without DFW staff acknowledgment. None of the DFW reports on Roosevelt elk since the "Draft Environmental Document, Elk Hunting" (dated Dec. 8, 2015) have ever addressed this TAHD spreading from Washington into Oregon and form Oregon into CA! What could be more important for the DFW staff to address than the threat and the impact of the spread of the TAHD to our Roosevelt elk herds? An infection that can only be treated by gunshot (death)! The promise by DFW staff, "surveillance, surveillance" did not stop the spread of this deadly TAHD into northern CA.

Once again, the FGC and Mr. Lehr, I want to refer the DFW to the theory regarding the use of toxic herbicides used in commercial agriculture and forestry. I have shared research (www.columbianinsight.org Gosch, Nov. 19, 2019) on the impact herbicides have on the Roosevelt elk's forage. In particular, "atrazine" was found by the National Toxicology Program (US Department of Health and Human Services) to adversely affect the immune system and was banned by the European Union in 2004 (www.chronline.com Gosch, Nov. 18, 2019).

In an article (www.columbian.com August 2, 2020), the progression of the TAHD over the past 10 years in an area in WA is suspected to be due to the spraying of herbicides. One resident observed that the new outbreaks of TAHD are occurring in areas near timberlands. Another observer noted how "sterile" the timberlands are after spraying without any signs of life among grouse, rabbits, and birds. I have not heard that the DFW is taking any samples of the soil to test for herbicides.

Currently, the DFW has at least 4 methods that they can implement to kill Roosevelt elk. It is tragic that the DFW does nothing to save our Roosevelt elk. The DFW has deliberately and consistently misled the public regarding the population of Roosevelt elk for at least the past 5 years. During this time, I have had the unfortunate experience of interacting with too many incompetent DFW staff. In my analysis, too many incompetent DFW staff to warrant funding by CA taxpayers. There appears to be no accountability here. If there can be social movements to demand reform, due to the destructive attitudes in police departments; then, I don't see why the same call for reform can't apply to encourage a social movement to de-fund the CA DFW. This institution presents itself as causing more harm to the magnificent environment in CA, than creating good.

Sincerely, Phoebe Lenhart Supporters for Del Norte Roosevelt Elk

From: Fresz, Shawn@Wildlife Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2020 12:39 PM To: Phoebe Lenhart ; FGC ; Lehr, Stafford@Wildlife ; Stoddard, Jeffrey@Wildlife ; Bartlett, Tina@Wildlife ; Burkholder, Brad@Wildlife ; Gardner, Scott@Wildlife ; Denryter, Kristin@Wildlife ; Roger Gitlin Subject: RE: Roosevelt elk, FGC meeting August 18-19, 2020. Agenda item #2 (the DFW stated that the Roosevelt elk are not an item on the agenda)

Good afternoon everyone,

I would like to clarify and respond to Phoebe’s first paragraph in her email below. During the July 14 Del Norte County Board of Supervisor meeting, the question of minimum counts for Roosevelt elk in Del Norte county was asked by supervisor Gitlin. The question was misunderstood and the answer of 1500 was given as an answer. 1500 is in fact the minimum count for Roosevelt elk in the entire North West Zone. The minimum count for elk in Del Norte in 2018 was 451. The minimum count for elk in Del Norte in 2019 was 404 but two herds were not able to be counted. I hope this clears up any confusion and I assure you that no deliberate deception was intended or will ever be intended by Department staff. I will also correct this misunderstanding with the Del Norte county Board of Supervisors. Please let me know if you have further questions.

Thank you,

Shawn Fresz Lands and Wildlife Program Supervisor California Department of Fish And Wildlife 619 2nd Street, Eureka California

*Please be advised that after 4/1/2020 my office number will be disconnected. Please use my cell phone number.

From: jonnel covault Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2020 10:30 AM To: FGC Subject: Comment re: Roosevelt elk on 8/18-19/2020 Agenda, item #2

Dear Wildlife Managers,

As a resident of Crescent City, who moved here for the wild and scenic recreation and beauty, I’m very concerned about the health of our Roosevelt elk.

After reading several studies, including “Treponeme-Associated Hoof Disease of Free-Ranging Elk (Cervus elaphus) in Southwest Washington State, USA” (Sept. 24, 2018), I became concerned that there is no way to stop TAHD. I talked to Kristin Mansfield, a co-author of this study. She said they had aggressively culled the St. Helens herd and so far there is no evidence that it stopped TAHD. I read a 2007 report from the USDA Wildlife Services on managing wildlife diseases. Culling was Not one of their top choices.

Collin Gillin, ODFW, told me that the spirochete bacteria is virulent and can live in the soil. It is disturbing how similar TAHD is to Bovine Digital Dermatitis (BDD). The 2018 SW WA study points to the giant Cowlitz drainage mudslide, where 200 cows died, as the probable moment when TAHD was “born”. Could dairy cows be transmitting BDD to elk? There are certainly plenty of examples of animals infecting humans, and of cows infecting wildlife and vice versa. Can money from elk tags go to fund more research?

Please do not increase the hunting of healthy elk until there is scientific evidence that hunting will help this situation. The 2007 USDA Wildlife Services report says that culling can disturb social structures which can lead to more migration, which can spread disease. Yes, culling suffering elk, with no hooves, mimics natural processes. But it is counterintuitive to kill healthy elk when the herd is sick.

If aggressive hunting is a legitimate method to address TAHD, the public needs to be aware of the scientific evidence.

Thank you,

Jonnel Covault

Crescent City

From: Janet Gilbert Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2020 5:00 PM To: FGC Subject: Roosevelt elk tag allotments

Warning: This email originated from outside of CDFW and should be treated with extra caution.

Dear California Fish and Game Commisioners, Thank you for the opportunity to weigh in on the issue of Roosevelt Elk tag allotments numbers for hunts and TAHD. I am very concerned that the tag allotment is too large and may result in a decrease in population numbers in Del Norte. As you know this is a species in recovery from near extinction and does not appear to be close to the recommended population numbers for the area as per the Del Norte elk count of 404 elk and as per the data collected for the past tens of years through Redwood National and State Parks annual elk report. (2018 is the last available data) Elk populations appear to fluctuate yearly up and down without showing great leaps in elk numbers. Now we have evidence of an infection in elk hoofs and our proposed hunt tag numbers are not targeting “damage hunts”. This seems unwise to me in that you are changing the ratio of diseased to non- diseased in the population increasing the fraction of diseased. Please reduce the number of trophy hunts and seek more data in the disease status and severity. Thank you for the opportunity to engage in the process.

Sincerely,

Janet Gilbert